Foreign policy does not promise to play an important role in the final weeks of the US presidential campaign, which is just as well. Neither George W. Bush nor Al Gore has outlined a coherent overview about how he might deal with global issues if elected.
Their limited comments to date have been mostly platitudinous and evasive. The latest example came yesterday when Mr Bush addressed a veterans convention and talked about how he might use American military power as president. But he didn't provide much illumination. He vowed to support 'a strong, capable and modern military' - not that Mr Gore has ever said he wants a weak one. However, he did sound one theme which puts a degree of difference between them. Mr Bush criticised the Clinton administration (and Mr Gore by implication) for ordering too many US soldiers into too many other countries for unclear national purposes. He suggested - but didn't promise - he would do less of it.
That is consistent with the somewhat unilateral approach of the foreign policy advisers Mr Bush has acquired from his father, the former president. They are much less interested than Mr Gore in joining with allies, Nato or (especially) the United Nations on peacekeeping or peacemaking expeditions to farflung places like Kosovo or nearby ones like Haiti. To some degree, they are more inclined to go it alone or not go at all.
But when Mr Bush gets down to cases, it is not entirely clear what he means. For one thing, he promised to 'maintain long-standing commitments', which suggests forces in South Korea, Japan or Europe don't face immediate reductions. As for Kosovo and Bosnia, he promised only to seek 'an orderly and timely withdrawal' of the 10,500 US troops there someday, which is about what Mr Gore wants.
His only specific concerned Haiti, where Mr Clinton's erratic intervention hasn't produced much growth or stability. But now there are fewer than 200 US troops working there on humanitarian missions, and it's not clear how bringing them home can make much difference to America's military prestige. In any case, they're providing civilian aid intended to reduce an unwanted flow of Haitian refugees to America.
In brief, this latest foray into foreign policy didn't provide much useful guidance. A curious world can only wonder if either candidate will be more specific by election day.
