Get Involved!

2008 Elections

U.S.-Arab Relations: Democratic Candidates

Posted on Thursday October 25, 2007

Sen. Hillary Clinton

On diplomatic missions and peace building in the MidEast:

Peace in the Middle East can not be achieved without a full diplomatic effort by the Administration that encourages America’s Arab allies in the region to take an active, and positive role in the process. . .As the Administration moves forward with plans for an international meeting to address the situation, it is my sincere hope that the Secretary of State does not pass up this pivotal opportunity to reach out to these nations to enlist their aid. However, we must also insist that their participation must be substantial, visible, and constructive as we take the next steps in attempting to bring peace and stability to the region.

October 3, 2007
Statement, Senate Website

Sen. Christopher Dodd

On the democrats’ role to provide Americans with security…

Well, that's a great question, Brian, because it's a myth in the sense when you consider what this administration has done over six years, given the attacks we faced on 9/11. Here, our first responders are not getting the support they deserve. The administration has been resistant in supporting them. The war in Iraq -- we haven't been dealing with the Taliban in Afghanistan, where our efforts should have been over the last number of years, not building the kind of international support -- stateless terrorism is a multinational problem. It's a tactic. It requires a multinational response. This administration has walked away from that. The very institutions we need to build to effectively engage and fight back against terrorism, this administration seems to take the other track and move in a different direction.

I would have answered your question earlier on what's a serious threat we face. It is stateless terrorism. It isn't states; it's the absence of diplomacy, the absence of engaging nations around the world to build those relationships that allow us to have a far more effective response to these -- this scourge that we face in this century. We need to have leadership that knows how to build those relationships, to encourage that kind of participation. This administration's done just the opposite.

April 26, 2007
Transcript, Democratic Presidential Debate, Orangeburg, SC

Former Sen. John Edwards

On why gas prices are still rising…

Well, for a lot of reasons. Number one, there's extraordinary demand in America, and we use 22 million barrels of oil a day; 12 million of those barrels are imported. It's the reason we have to make a bold transformation from what we're doing now.

And also on the issue of climate change, we ought to cap carbon emissions in the United States. We ought to invest in clean, alternative sources of energy. We ought to invest in carbon sequestration technology, clean-coal technology, a billion dollars at least into making sure we build the most fuel-efficient vehicles on the planet. And we ought to ask Americans to be patriotic about something other than war; to be willing to conserve.

I think the question we should be asking ourselves, how does America change the underlying dynamic of what's happening in the world? We need to maintain our strength -- military, economic, political. But how do we ultimately change what's happening, the threats that America faces? I think for that to occur, the world has to see America as a force for good again, which is why I've talked about making -- leading an effort to make primary school education available to 100 million children in the world who don't have it in the Muslim world, in Africa, in Latin America; leading an international effort on sanitation, clean drinking water; economic development, using microfinance as a tool. I mean here's a way that America could actually demonstrate its commitment to humanity, which I think is critical for our leadership.

On what he would do if another al Qaeda attack were to occur…

… Well, the first thing I would do is be certain I knew who was responsible, and I would act swiftly and strongly to hold them responsible for that. The second thing I would do, and some of these have been mentioned already, is find out how that this happened without our intelligence operations finding out that it was in a planning stage.

How did they get through what we all recognize is a fairly porous homeland security system that we have in this country that has not been built the way it needed to be built? You know, did the weapons that created this -- these two simultaneous strikes come through our ports? Were they in one of the containers that have not been checked? How did these weapons get here? And how do we stop this from happening again? I believe -- and this goes to the question you asked earlier, just a few minutes ago -- global war on terror. I think there are dangerous people and dangerous leaders in the world that America must deal with and deal with strongly, but we have more tools available to us than bombs. And America needs to use the tools that are available to them so that these people who are sitting on the fence, who terrorists are trying to recruit, the next generation, get pushed to our side, not to the other side. We've had no long-term strategy, and we need one, and I will provide one.

April 26, 2007
Transcript, Democratic Presidential Debate, Orangeburg, SC

Rep. Dennis Kucinich

The metaphor that we're using here is one that relates to, really, 9/11 and the terror that followed, and the politicization of fear which occurred in this society.

A Kucinich administration will be about strength through peace. No unilateralism, no preemption, no first-strike, using -- and a rejection of war as an instrument of policy.

So of course you'd use a pardon, but we have to remember, this Constitution has to be redeemed and this administration has took us down a -- really, a (inaudible).

I will not only restore the Constitution, but I want a new national security doctrine, strength through peace, that will make us safer, because the neo kind approach has made America less safe and more vulnerable.

September 26, 2007
Transcript, Democratic Presidential Debate, Hanover, NH

Sen. Barack Obama

On if he would visit countries with which the US has poor relations with in order to broker peace…

I would. And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them -- which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration -- is ridiculous.

Now, Ronald Reagan and Democratic presidents like JFK constantly spoke to Soviet Union at a time when Ronald Reagan called them an evil empire. And the reason is because they understood that we may not trust them and they may pose an extraordinary danger to this country, but we had the obligation to find areas where we can potentially move forward.

And I think that it is a disgrace that we have not spoken to them. We’ve been talking about Iraq -- one of the first things that I would do in terms of moving a diplomatic effort in the region forward is to send a signal that we need to talk to Iran and Syria because they’re going to have responsibilities if Iraq collapses.

They have been acting irresponsibly up until this point. But if we tell them that we are not going to be a permanent occupying force, we are in a position to say that they are going to have to carry some weight, in terms of stabilizing the region.

July 23, 2007
Transcript, Democratic Presidential Debate, Charleston, SC,

Gov. Bill Richardson

The Middle East has reached a tipping point and it will take strong, direct US leadership to help reduce tensions and restart the peace process. President Bush is doing the right thing by calling for a regional peace conference and I support these efforts. Unfortunately the administration's preoccupation with Iraq has caused us to lose focus on critical foreign policy challenges such as the Israeli-Palestinian situation and the renewed conflict in Lebanon. We have lost a great deal of valuable time and the situation is critical. I know this region well from my time as Congressman, US Ambassador to the United Nations and Energy Secretary. The peace conference is a good first step, but I believe the US must also appoint a permanent Middle East envoy to work directly and closely countries throughout the region. Only then will Middle Eastern leaders begin to believe that the US is truly committed to helping find a lasting peace.

July 16, 2007
Press Release on the Administration’s plan for a Middle East Peace Conference