Click amount to donate direct to CounterPunch
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $500
  • $other
  • use PayPal
Support Our Annual Fund Drive! CounterPunch is entirely supported by our readers. Your donations pay for our small staff, tiny office, writers, designers, techies, bandwidth and servers. We don’t owe anything to advertisers, foundations, one-percenters or political parties. You are our only safety net. Please make a tax-deductible donation today.
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Mitt Romney: a True Political Cynic

by MELVIN A. GOODMAN

Mitt Romney’s three debate performances in October 2012 have exposed his political cynicism, with the Republican candidate abandoning long-term positions in order to adopt more moderate ideas for the run-up to next month’s election.  Prior to the debates, Romney’s domestic positions resembled President Ronald Reagan’s retreat from governance particularly on entitlements and such non-defense expenditures as education and energy.  Like Reagan, Romney believes that government cannot provide the solution to any problem because government is the problem.  Last night, Romney abandoned his strident and bellicose ideas on foreign policy in order to echo President Barack Obama’s policies on Afghanistan, Iran, Libya, and Syria.  Romney’s obfuscation on domestic issues caught the president off-guard on October 3rd; his obfuscation on foreign policy issues allowed the president to expose the chicanery of the challenger.

There were no indications of the Romney who challenged the president’s withdrawal timeline for Afghanistan; would have left more troops in Iraq; considered Russia the nation’s most serious geostrategic threat; and took issue with the negotiation of the new START treaty that halved the numbers of warheads and launchers in US and Russian strategic inventories.  Romney made no mention of the tragic events in Bengazi last month, presumably because he finally realizes that the intelligence community did a poor job of anticipating and then tracking the attack on the US Consulate. 

There were issues that were not raised in the debate that would have provided stark contrasts between the president and the challenger.  Unlike Obama, who ended the practice of torture and abuse, Romney justified the use of waterboarding and his advisors have defended the “dark side” of enhanced interrogation techniques.  These advisors include Steve Bradbury, who headed the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel in the Bush administration, Cully Stimson, who occupied a sensitive position in the Pentagon in the Bush administration, and such lawyers as Lee Casey and David Rivkin.  Romney’s foreign policy advisors also include many of the neoconservatives who counseled President Bush, including John Bolton, Dan Senor, and Richard Williamson. 

Bradbury’s office “authorized” the torture tactics in 2002 that were okayed by President Bush, Vice President Cheney, National Security Advisor Rice, and Attorney General Ashcroft, among others.  Unfortunately, Obama’s attorney general, Eric Holder, recently gave a “distinguished service award” to Assistant US Attorney John Durham, who refused to hold accountable anyone in the CIA for its brutal interrogations of detainees at secret prisons or “black sites” in connection with the Bush administration’s “war on terror” and the destruction of the infamous torture tapes. 

Romney avoided much of the Cold War language of the campaign season, but he still managed to be gratuitously aggressive toward China and Russia, who are important stakeholders in the diplomatic arena, and blithely ignorant of the multilateral diplomacy needed to coordinate effective sanctions measures against Iran and Syria.  Obama was spot on when he charged that Romney had “imported his foreign policies from the eighties, his social policies from the fifties, and his economic policies from the twenties. 

Romney’s shocking ignorance of the superiority and dominance of the Air Force and the Navy brought into question his support for an additional $2 trillion for the defense budget over the next ten years.  Prior to the debate, Romney pledged to spend at least four percent of gross domestic product on defense, a bizarre way to plan for national defense.  His support for reopening the production line for the F-22 fighter  plane would cost an additional $120 billion over the next ten years.  Romney supports a comprehensive national missile defense, which has never proven to be effective, as well as wider regional missile defenses in East Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia, which will contribute to  greater regional disarray.

In an effort to establish credibility on key regional issues, Romney merely unveiled  substantive ignorance.  His allegation that Iran viewed Syria as an outlet to the sea ignored the 1,500 miles of coastline that Iran controls on the Persian Gulf.  His call for an end to Iranian oil imports into the United States ignored the ban on such imports that was put in place by President Reagan twenty-five years ago.  His call for indicting Iran’s Prime Minister Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as a war criminal was no more than an off-the-wall sound bite. 

Over the past four years, President Obama has demonstrated an awareness of the limits on the use of force.  The withdrawal from Iraq; the start of a withdrawal from Afghanistan; the nuanced involvement in Libya; and the hesitation on involvement in Syria reflects the war weariness of the country, the country’s budgetary problems, and the constraints of force.  Until Monday night’s debate, Romney appeared to take a page out of the John F. Kennedy’s inaugural address (“We will pay any price and bear any burden.”), which led the country into Vietnam.  Despite his conciliatory debate language, there is no reason to expect Romney to ameliorate his positions on national security, let alone his economic and social policies. 

Melvin A. Goodman is a former CIA senior analyst and the author of the forthcoming National Insecurity: The Cost of American Militarism (City Lights Publishers, January 2013).

Melvin A. Goodman is a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy and a professor of government at Johns Hopkins University.  A former CIA analyst, Goodman is the author of “Failure of Intelligence: The Decline and Fall of the CIA,” “National Insecurity: The Cost of American Militarism,” and the forthcoming “The Path to Dissent: A Whistleblower at CIA” (City Lights Publishers, 2015).  Goodman is the national security columnist for counterpunch.org.

More articles by:

2016 Fund Drive
Smart. Fierce. Uncompromised. Support CounterPunch Now!

  • cp-store
  • donate paypal

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

Weekend Edition
September 30, 2016
Friday - Sunday
Henry Giroux
Thinking Dangerously in the Age of Normalized Ignorance
Stanley L. Cohen
Israel and Academic Freedom: a Closed Book
Paul Craig Roberts – Michael Hudson
Can Russia Learn From Brazil’s Fate? 
Andrew Levine
A Putrid Election: the Horserace as Farce
Mike Whitney
The Biggest Heist in Human History
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: the Sick Blue Line
Vijay Prashad
In a Hall of Mirrors: Fear and Dislike at the Polls
Alexander Cockburn
The Man Who Built Clinton World
John Wight
Who Will Save Us From America?
W. T. Whitney
When Women’s Lives Don’t Matter
Jeremy Brecher
Dakota Access Pipeline and the Future of American Labor
Binoy Kampmark
Pictures Left Incomplete: MH17 and the Joint Investigation Team
Andrew Kahn
Nader Gave Us Bush? Hillary Could Give Us Trump
Steve Horn
Obama Weakens Endangered Species Act
Dave Lindorff
US Propaganda Campaign to Demonize Russia in Full Gear over One-Sided Dutch/Aussie Report on Flight 17 Downing
John W. Whitehead
Uncomfortable Truths You Won’t Hear From the Presidential Candidates
Ramzy Baroud
Shimon Peres: Israel’s Nuclear Man
Brandon Jordan
The Battle for Mercosur
Murray Dobbin
A Globalization Wake-Up Call
Jesse Ventura
Corrupted Science: the DEA and Marijuana
Andrew Sullivan
The Democratic Plot to Privatize Social Security
Daniel Borgstrom
On the Streets of Oakland, Expressing Solidarity with Charlotte
Marjorie Cohn
President Obama: ‘Patron’ of the Israeli Occupation
Norman Pollack
The “Self-Hating” Jew: A Critique
David Rosen
The Living Body & the Ecological Crisis
W. T. Whitney
When Women’s Lives Don’t Matter
Richard W. Behan
Hillary Clinton and Our Moribund Democracy
Joseph Natoli
Thoughtcrimes and Stupidspeak: Our Assault Against Words
Ron Jacobs
A Cycle of Death Underscored by Greed and a Lust for Power
Kim Nicolini
Long Drive Home
Art Martin
The Matrix Around the Next Bend: Facebook, Augmented Reality and the Podification of the Populace
Andre Vltchek
Failures of the Western Left
Laura Finley
Presidential Debate Recommendations
José Negroni
Mass Firings on Broadway Lead Singers to Push Back
Leticia Cortez
Entering the Historical Dissonance Surrounding Desafinados
Robert J. Burrowes
Gandhi: ‘My Life is My Message’
Charles R. Larson
Queen Lear? Deborah Levy’s “Hot Milk”
September 29, 2016
Robert Fisk
The Butcher of Qana: Shimon Peres Was No Peacemaker
James Rose
Politics in the Echo Chamber: How Trump Becomes President
Russell Mokhiber
The Corporate Vice Grip on the Presidential Debates
Daniel Kato
Rethinking the Race over Race: What Clinton Should do Now About ‘Super-Predators’
Peter Certo
Clinton’s Awkward Stumbles on Trade
Fran Shor
Demonizing the Green Party Vote
Rev. William Alberts
Trump’s Road Rage to the White House
Luke O'Brien
Because We Couldn’t Have Sanders, You’ll Get Trump
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail
[i]
[i]
[i]
[i]