Countering “dangerous movements at home might be the most productive thing we can do to maintain a convincing voice abroad,” one reader argues.
Welcome to Up for Debate. Each week, Conor Friedersdorf rounds up timely conversations and solicits reader responses to one thought-provoking question. Later, he publishes some thoughtful replies. Sign up for the newsletter here.
Last week I noted that presidential candidates in the 2024 election will discuss U.S. foreign policy toward China, Russia, Ukraine, Israel, Iran, Mexico, and beyond, and asked, “What foreign-policy matters are most important to you and why?”
Replies have been edited for length and clarity.
Caroline focuses on the movement of people:
When I started thinking about this question, my immediate response was: the wars. Gaza and Ukraine. But no. That’s not the biggest foreign-policy issue we face today. A far bigger issue is the worldwide migration of people, from the Southern Hemisphere to the Northern, caused as much by climate change as by political threats. As climate change makes the southern half of Earth less habitable, freedom and food and water all get unbearably scarce, forcing the mass movements we’re seeing today. How governments in the north respond to this crisis, or fail to respond, is crucial to world peace. Sadly, because of the nasty political situation in Washington, the U.S. government has no coherent policy to deal with this. It’s an international issue and urgently needs attention.
V.F. flagged the war in Ukraine:
This situation has profound implications not only for Ukraine itself but also for regional stability and international security. First and foremost, the conflict jeopardizes the principles of territorial integrity and sovereignty, which are fundamental tenets of the international order.
Moreover, the war in Ukraine has a significant impact on the geopolitical landscape in Europe. The annexation of Crimea by Russia and the strife in eastern regions of Ukraine have resulted in extensive devastation and human losses. Such instability may provoke alarming reactions from other nations and lead to further strained relations.
Additionally, it is crucial to consider Ukraine’s geostrategic position as a key player in contemporary geopolitical and economic processes. This country serves as a crossroads between Eastern and Western Europe, and the resolution of the conflict in Ukraine could shape future relations between Russia and the West. Ensuring peace and stability in Ukraine becomes a vital component of foreign-policy strategy to guarantee security and promote democratic development in the region. In general, it is essential for candidates in the 2024 elections to address the issue of resolving the conflict in Ukraine, examining it within the context of international relations and democratic development, and implementing measures to secure peace and stability in the region.
For Jaleelah, “it’s Palestine”:
Of course it’s Palestine. My family in the West Bank are actively under threat. The IDF arbitrarily invades their homes and degrades them at checkpoints. The Palestinian Authority is a corrupt and toothless organization that allows Israeli soldiers to throw their children in prison. What American would stand by if their family was in that position? What American would vote for a government that dropped even a single bomb on one of their cities in order to root out cartel members suspected to be hiding there?
A sizable [number] of Arabs and Muslims oppose Israel’s bombing of Gaza. Lots of non-Arab and non-Muslim Americans agree. But political parties refuse to take even mild, wildly popular stances that criticize Israel. This is baffling to me. The Democratic Party ignored its working-class base for years, and it culminated in a loss to a clown in 2016. Now it believes that it can ignore its base’s calls for peace without facing repercussions simply because the Republicans are also bad. But the hundreds of thousands of Arab voters in Michigan and Ohio do not care that Donald Trump moved the Israeli embassy to Jerusalem; they care that Joe Biden is sanctioning the murders of thousands of innocent people. Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley would probably rather drop out of the race than adjust their stances, but Trump is unpredictable. All it would take is a single social-media post calling for a ceasefire—or even a post that says “I condemn Israel’s killings of civilians”—for him to capture massive support in very important areas!
For Nati, it’s Israel:
For the average American, U.S. foreign policy is a problem that rarely affects their lives. As an expat Israeli who belongs to the Jewish people, I have great fear for my people, wherever they are. The way candidates plan to protect us will be a deciding factor for me. Cracks in Biden’s support for Israel are forming and expanding. These are not mainly due to sudden changes in Israel’s response, but to mounting pressure from young “progressives” in American universities and on the streets throughout Europe. Perhaps more important than the candidates’ 10-minute pitch on their foreign-policy focus, I want to know how they are going to sell it to the American people.
Biden’s remarks after October 7 are all but an echo now. Obama described the “[extraordinarily] complex situation” in the region well, but stopped short of addressing protesters directly, in a way that could have shifted the rhetoric significantly worldwide. Nikki Haley’s hawkish arguments are only sold to those who already bought into them to begin with (me included).
Dale wants candidates to debate an international policy aimed at eradicating drug cartels. He writes:
For generations, American youth who experiment with drugs have had to plug into a criminal subculture run by violent predatory gangs to get their drugs. As a licensed marriage and family therapist with a two-year certificate in alcohol and drug counseling, I have had many years to observe how corrosive this contact can be. The predatory attitudes of dealers and suppliers have, I believe, been normalized over the years in many individuals who use street drugs, and my guess is that they have spread into youth culture in general.
American administrations from Reagan on have continued doubling down on the War on Drugs while refusing to provide equal amounts of money to support treatment for addicts. Nobody has the political will to point out that 50 years of this war has left us in worse shape than we were in 1990.
Leo argues that strength abroad depends on changes at home:
What we seem to see in the rise of nations like China and India, as best I understand them, is not just the promotion of their own interests but also the assertion of their own worldviews. They don’t just want to win a conflict; they want to redefine the terms of engagement.
To whatever extent the West (the U.S.A., Canada, the U.K., the European Union, and other nations with similar ideals) still promotes a cohesive vision for the world, that vision involves what the West understands as basic human rights, the primacy of individual liberty, and the principles of an open and diverse society. Some of the most powerful nations of the 21st century, however, do not seem inclined to accept these values as a fundamental, let alone obligatory, aspect of their own international relations.
Countries like the U.S.A., of course, often fall short of their own aspirations. We suffer from a MAGA movement that seems keen to elect a candidate openly embracing the language of fascists. We also suffer from a leftist movement opposed to free speech, contemptuous of dissent (other than its own), and seemingly oblivious to its own narrow-minded tendencies. Showing we can counter these dangerous movements at home might be the most productive thing we can do to maintain a convincing voice abroad.
This newsletter will be off next week. We wish you all a happy Thanksgiving, and we’ll be back the week of December 4.
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Andrew Mitrovica
Mort Laitner
Rami G Khouri
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
visit website
