For the next president, a key test

Each candidate must give clearer visions of a post-Iraq-war world and why she or he should be the one to lead it.

from the May 2, 2007 edition

Page 2 of 2

Page 1 | 2

He also adopted President Bush's apocalyptic imagery by saying the US must continue to "lead the world in battling immediate evils and promoting the ultimate good." Hillary Clinton was far less bold in her big speech, given last October, although the two Democratic front-runners strongly emphasize using "soft power," such as education aid to Arab people, to drain the terrorist threat.

Perhaps the candidate with the most foreign-policy experience is Bill Richardson (New Mexico's governor who was UN ambassador, diplomatic troubleshooter, and energy secretary). He stands out for highlighting a nonterrorist concern about the "simultaneous rise" of India, China, and Russia and the need to integrate these nuclear-armed nations into a stable global order.

GOP candidates, perhaps not willing to alienate a pro-Bush Republican base, have been far less specific about their foreign policy.

Yet voters deserve as much detail as possible on each candidate's world vision. Free or fair trade? Threaten Iran or talk with it? Contain Chinese power? Invade Darfur? Build a bigger US military? Work more with the UN?

Soon the candidates must be pinned down on such questions, before one of them sits in the Oval Office come 2009.

1 | Page 2