• Commentary
  • Research
  • Experts
  • Events
Carnegie China logoCarnegie lettermark logo
{
  "authors": [
    "Matthew Rojansky"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "russia",
  "programs": [
    "Russia and Eurasia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "East Asia",
    "China",
    "Caucasus",
    "Russia"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

The Great Debate

The third presidential debate lacked a strategic vision for U.S. foreign policy toward Russia and China.

Link Copied
By Matthew Rojansky
Published on Oct 23, 2012

Source: National Interest

President Obama and Governor Romney battled to claim the mantle of strategic wisdom for their respective positions on recent events in the Middle East. Yet a strategic vision for U.S. foreign policy was not much in evidence when it came to at least two key relationships: Russia and China.

On Russia, the candidates practiced pure political hyperbole, with the president portraying Romney as stuck in a Cold War mindset and Romney in turn blasting Obama as naive in offering Putin “flexibility.” Though Romney bemoaned Russia’s rejection of U.S. nonproliferation assistance and Obama suggested he had won Russian backing for crippling Iran sanctions, neither explained how he would get relations with Russia back on track after the past year of dramatic decline.

China was mentioned, predictably, as an unfair economic competitor but also as a potential partner for dealing with global challenges. Given China’s overwhelming indifference to the issues of Middle East democracy, Iran and terrorism that dominated much of the debate, it would have been useful to hear at least a few ideas about how to engage China as a responsible stakeholder in international security.

About the Author

Matthew Rojansky

Former Deputy Director, Russia and Eurasia Program

Rojansky, formerly executive director of the Partnership for a Secure America, is an expert on U.S. and Russian national security and nuclear-weapon policies.

    Recent Work

  • Paper
    An Opportunity for Ambition: Ukraine’s OSCE Chairmanship

      Matthew Rojansky

  • In The Media
    Presiding Over the OSCE: Challenges and Opportunities

      Matthew Rojansky

Matthew Rojansky
Former Deputy Director, Russia and Eurasia Program
Matthew Rojansky
Foreign PolicyNorth AmericaUnited StatesEast AsiaChinaCaucasusRussia

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie China

  • Commentary
    China Financial Markets
    The Plaza Accord and Its Relevance for China

    The Plaza Accord was not an externally imposed punishment of Japan but part of a broader restructuring that Japanese economists and policymakers themselves recognized was necessary. Its effects were undermined, however, when Tokyo responded to the resulting slowdown with policies that exacerbated investment, credit expansion, and the very imbalances the adjustment was intended to resolve.

      Michael Pettis

  • The nuclear missile formation passes through Tian'anmen Square during a military parade on September 3, 2025 in Beijing, China.
    Paper
    Untangling the Nuclear Knot: A Constructive Agenda for Managing China’s Nuclear Relations with the United States and Its Allies

    The nuclear relationship between China and the United States is increasingly shaped by widening perception gaps rather than deliberate strategic design.

      Tong Zhao

  • Commentary
    China Financial Markets
    Who Paid for China’s Last Debt Cleanup, and Who Will Pay for the Next?

    China’s banking crisis in the 2000s was resolved by transferring the costs to households through financial repression—a decision that recapitalized the banks while exacerbating the structural imbalances that continue to shape the Chinese economy today.

      Michael Pettis

  • Robot arm with disposable test tube virus sampling in laboratory
    Commentary
    Caught in the Middle: Chinese Biotech Firms’ Divergent Responses to U.S. Sanctions

    Chinese biotech companies have been on the receiving end of U.S. economic coercion. Yet their responses have differed significantly because firm and state interests are not uniformly aligned. For Washington, treating all Chinese tech firms the same, irrespective of their actual interests, risks pushing them farther into Beijing’s corner.

      Xue Gong

  • An aerial drone photo taken on June 4, 2026 shows a wind-photovoltaic power storage station of Huadian Inner Mongolia New Energy Co., Ltd. as part of the Horinger data center cluster green energy supply demonstration project, in Hohhot, north China's Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region.
    Commentary
    Are Data Centers the Solution to China’s Renewables Excess Capacity?

    China’s latest energy plan explicitly calls for integrating data centers into the electricity system, particularly connecting them to green energy. It appears Beijing wants to use compute as a source of domestic demand to absorb renewables excess capacity.

      • Damien Ma

      Damien Ma

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie China
Carnegie China logo, white
Keck Seng Tower133 Cecil Street #10-01ASingapore, 069535Phone: +65 9650 7648
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie China
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.