By John Ubaldi, “Ubaldi Reports”

The world is in chaos with a simmering Middle East waiting to blow into major conflict, an aggressive Russia, expansionist China, turmoil in Latin America, and this to name just a few of the challenges that will await the next president.

So far in the Democratic debates the focus has been squarely on domestic policy, with health care being the most important issues discussed, minimal discussion of any meaningful policy on how each of the candidates would handle global issues and what would be there national security vision?

Even when the discussion crossed into foreign policy, the moderators failed to press the candidate’s further thus allowing them to promulgate prepared talking points only appealing to the audience without allowing for further deliberation on substance.

Every president assumes the mantle as president as the “leader of the free world,” and each previous president since the end of the Cold War wanted to focus just on domestic policy, but all were forced by circumstance to pivot to an international crisis they had to deal with.  Whoever is sworn in as president in January 2021 will undoubtedly face a global crisis.

With the presidential election campaign moving forward, we have begun a series of articles assessing the credentials and polices of the Democratic candidates. This week we will examine the national security vision of former Congressional Representative from Texas, Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke.

O’Rourke’s Political Experience

If elected president, O’Rourke would bring experience gained from being an El Paso, Texas City council representative, prior to his election he graduated from Columbia University with a degree in English Literature.

In 2012 O’Rourke was elected to the House of Representative serving until 2018 where he opted to run against incumbent Republican Senator Ted Cruz, he eventually lost that race then in 2019 decided to seek the Democratic nomination for President of the United States.

Climate Change a Serious National Security Concern

All Democrats running for president have made combating climate change a central tenant of their national security strategy and Beto O’Rourke is no different pledging a comprehensive $5 trillion in dealing with this crisis, in which he commits the United States to rejoining the Paris Climate Accords.

This is the controversial agreement the Trump administration pulled out of.

One aspect of O’Rourke’s climate initiative is that “The United States should lead by example, showing other countries it is not only viable, but economically advantageous, to make transformative investments in green energy.”

Opponents would counter how would you Deal with China?

Opponents would counter how would you get China to sign on to such an ambitious proposal when at the Paris Climate Acord in 2009, Beijing went into the negotiations with the strategy of saying no to everything that would impact their economy, knowing the west wanted a deal so bad they were willing to sign any agreement.

The questions remains, how would an O’Rourke administration get China to comply too environmental agreements since they are the largest emitters of greenhouse gases?

Questions have also arisen on the contentious issue of trade and how would O’Rourke deal with China?  O’Rourke’s presidential campaign website, states if elected his administration would defend American values and interests against competitors like China by modernizing the World Trade Organization to address 21st century trade issues and leading a global coalition to stop China’s anti-competitive behavior.

Beto has also outlined a series of progressive actions he would be prepared to enact unilaterally if elected president that would increase pressure on China if the WTO fails to act.

The question proponents would argue is how would he place pressure on the WTO, what reforms would he enact to modernize the WTO, and finally what pressure would he place on China, would he continue the trade tariffs imposed by President Trump or is he contemplating a far different strategy?

Strategy for Dealing with Iran

With the nation’s focus on tensions with Iran, O’Rourke has outlined a strategy by having the United States re-join the Iran nuclear agreement, conditional on Tehran’s compliance with its precepts.  By re-joining the agreement and beginning future negotiations with Iran would an O’Rourke administration lift all sanctions on Iran, as Tehran has stipulated no talks can begin until all sanctions are lifted.

The initial agreement signed by President Obama lifted all sanctions on Iran and repatriated frozen assets frozen since the 1979 Iranian revolution.

With this in mind how would an O’Rourke administration deal Iran utilizing the revenue from the lifting of economic sanctions and not using it to fund its proxy forces in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and elsewhere, since this is what Tehran precisely did after the agreement was signed? How would O’Rourke prevent this in the future?

O’Rourke’s Middle East Strategy

With renewed focus on the Middle East, O’Rourke like many other Democratic candidates’ running for president want to extricate U.S. military from the “endless wars” in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and elsewhere, but like the others have been vague on the details if a precipitous withdrawal is to take place would it replicate the disastrous pullout from Iraq in 2011?

This removal of all U.S. combat forces led to the rise of ISIS and a return back of American military forces in Iraq and Syria to counter the threat posed by the Islamic State in the region and one that still poses a threat day?

O’Rourke also has been vague on what his counterterrorism strategy would be or how he would deal with a resurgent Russia or the many other regional trouble spot’s the United States is currently engaged in.  What would an O’Rourke defense strategy look like since he has not addressed this subject on his campaign website or in any public forum?

All presidents whether they like it or not will have to deal with national security, but if history is any guide what was is said on the campaign trail often is left in the dust of reality.