2012: Obama vs. Romney
Including Aaron L. Friedberg, a foreign policy adviser to Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican nominee for president; Michèle Flournoy, co-founder of the Center for a New American Security; Janine Davidson, professor at George Mason University; and Jim Lindsay, senior vice president and director of studies at the Council on Foreign Relations
(Mike Segar / Courtesy Retuers)
While campaigning for the highest office in the land, presidential hopefuls and their advisers have turned to Foreign Affairs to publish essays laying out how they see the world. Click here to see a full collection of those articles, grouped by election year.

For decades, U.S. China policy has been driven by a combination of engagement and balancing. The Obama administration has put too much weight on the first, and diplomatic happy talk has done nothing to halt Beijing’s military buildup. The next administration should get real about China and bolster the balancing half of Washington’s strategic equation.

Tough economic times are often met in Washington with calls for retrenchment. But for decades, write two former top Pentagon officials, long-term forward deployments of U.S. forces and robust alliances have guaranteed stability and uninterrupted trade, the very conditions the United States needs for economic prosperity. The Obama administration gets it.

The president knows that a foreign policy crisis -- especially one his critics have forewarned -- could derail his reelection campaign at any time. So, during the State of the Union address, he will try to give himself some political cover on a few issues in particular: Iran, Afghanistan, and Iraq.

In the first debate focused on national security issues, GOP presidential candidates sparred over tactics to end Iran's nuclear program, fight in Afghanistan, and challenge China. Only, as they tried to undercut Obama, they repeatedly demonstrated how little, actually, their worldview differed from his.
