Matthew Rojansky
{
"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
The Great Debate
The third presidential debate lacked a strategic vision for U.S. foreign policy toward Russia and China.
Source: National Interest

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
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.
- An Opportunity for Ambition: Ukraine’s OSCE ChairmanshipPaper
- Presiding Over the OSCE: Challenges and OpportunitiesIn The Media
Matthew Rojansky
Recent Work
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 Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
- Israel’s Security Means Insecurity in the Middle EastCommentary
As negotiations with Iran and Lebanon continue, chaos is at the heart of the Netanyahu government’s calculations.
Michael Young
- Pushing Beirut into an Armed Conflict With Hezbollah Is InsaneCommentary
The party’s domestic and regional roles have changed, so Lebanon should devise a disarmament strategy that encompasses this.
Michael Young
- Corrupted by Absolute PowerCommentary
In an interview, Marc Lynch discusses his new book decrying the post-1990 U.S.-dominated order in the Middle East.
Michael Young
- Why Does the Middle East Suffer “Forever Wars”?Commentary
Because perpetual conflict enhances control, offers economic benefits, and allows leaders to ignore popular preferences.
Angie Omar
- Where is the Groundwork for Lebanon’s Negotiations With Israel?Commentary
A prerequisite of serious talks is that the country’s leadership consolidates majority national support for such a process.
Michael Young