Share “Michael Gerson: Relentlessly reassuring...”

Michael Gerson: Relentlessly reassuring Romney

Published: October 24, 2012

“The first requirement of a statesman is that he be dull,” said Dean Acheson.

During the final presidential debate, Mitt Romney was every bit the statesman. On foreign policy issues, he was well-informed, earnest and gaffe-free. He refused to take the bait of hypothetical questions or Barack Obama's continual attacks. All evening, when Obama unleashed fireworks, Romney smothered them with a blanket.

We know from the second debate that Romney is pricklier than this. So his self-restraint was also evidence of a strategy. It amounted to a bold bet that boldness was not required. Romney set out to be relentlessly reassuring. Instead of pointing out contrasts, he systematically attended to his own credibility.

The image that emerged was a foreign policy moderate in tone and substance. Romney seemed a man who holds certain values but lacks disruptive projects and causes. He criticized Obama's foreign policy mainly on implementation rather than proposing an alternative grand strategy.

Romney summarized his own views as “principles of peace.” No direct intervention in Syria. No extension of the withdrawal deadline in Afghanistan. “We can't kill our way out of this mess,” he insisted, unexpectedly pointing to the limits of drone strikes and special operations. In a deft, sophisticated move, Romney recommended a comprehensive soft-power strategy in the Middle East — economic development, better education, gender equality, the rule of law — as an alternative to later, messier interventions.

All this was an homage — perhaps a conscious one — to Ronald Reagan's debate performance in 1980 against Jimmy Carter. Reagan was fighting a reputation for militarism and intemperance. In answer to his first question, he said, “I'm only here to tell you that I believe with all my heart that our first priority must be world peace, and that use of force is always and only a last resort, when everything else has failed, and then only with regard to our national security.” This reassurance was a hurdle cleared in his race to the presidency.

Romney employed the same argument, using some of the same words. Obama came into the foreign policy debate prepared to attack Romney as “wrong and reckless.” Every moment of Romney's actual performance was a refutation of this argument. Obama's incessant aggressiveness was a lingering reaction to the passivity of his first debate performance.

Continue reading this story on the...


  1. 1
    Report: NBA to investigate Derek Fisher-Matt Barnes confrontation
  2. 2
    Prohibition-style speakeasies still entice
  3. 3
    Former Thunder forward Caron Butler recounts Arenas-Crittenton gun incident
  4. 4
    Clinton opposes Obama's TPP trade deal
  5. 5
    DUI suspect leads Bixby police on high-speed chase early Wednesday
+ show more


× Trending opinion Article