Wikipedia defines foreign policy as follows: “A government’s policy relating to matters beyond it own jurisdiction: usually relations with other nations and international organisations.” After the first presidential debate it is very difficult to relate candidates’ view to this definition.
For both candidates foreign policy seems to be more about retaliation and acting against than dialogue. There was no talk about jurisdiction and just couple comments from Obama about initiating dialogue. It is rather strange that action seems to be the only way to deal the issues in: Irak, Iran, Russia, North Korea, and the list goes on. Of course there are issues in those countries, but it is dangerous to undermine the importance of dialogue which can’t be replaced with analysts.
Another aspect which was not covered in detail was the US image outside the country. If that is not part of foreign policy what is? As a Finn and European this seemed very strange. I believe everyone agrees that no single country can fight against all the bad guys of this planet in isolation. Cooperation and alliances are very important. This can be seen in Iraq where the number of nationalities (number of NATO countries participating) has gone down every year. Are all the other nations wrong about the war?