Credibility of Opinion on the Foreign Policy in the US - Essay Example

Ever since the end of the Cold War, many have projected substantial vicissitudes in the scope, configuration, and resolve of the platform, numerous of which have been approved and implemented. The emphasis on US foreign aid strategy has also been altered since the terrorist assaults of September 11, 2001 (Tarnoff, 2004). The problem with having to listen to the opinion on foreign policies by the former president of the same party will not present anything different. There will hardly be any critical aspect to it. Presidents follow the policies of their parties especially when it comes to the military operations in effect. By only changing the face of the person who announces important messages on TV will not make much of a difference. “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation” -- President Obama (Greenwald, 2011).

A former US president would be a more rational choice when it comes to the credibility of the opinion regarding foreign policies. If on the other hand, a former US president who was of the same party as the existing one, will probably have a small soft corner for the party and consequently for its policies. This defeats the purpose of objectivity, hence less credibility in the opinions.

One other factor that supports the argument is the financial crisis of 2007-2008 that has lingered on more than it was supposed to. Plus, many experts are still forecasting another financial crisis. The United States lost its top-class triple-A credit rating from Standard & Poor's, in a melodramatic setback of wealth for the world's leading economy (John Harwood, 2011).

Taking a critical look at the existing foreign policy will reveal that; The objective of any foreign policy is to establish better relations with other countries. Encourage trade and upsurge growth in commerce. The US should be a safer place and it should be liked by other people from other countries. Right now, the US is under debt and its credibility has been downgraded. The current administration is still in pursuit of the war plans that were set out by the previous governments. All in all, there has not been any improvement in achieving explicit foreign policy goals. As it has been stated earlier, the head or chairman of a political party is usually following the party rules and for this reason, the credibility of the opinion of any former person will not be of any real worth.

Some would argue that a former president of the existing party would have a better idea of what works and what does not. But to apply this rule, other circumstances need to be considered. Right now the former president of the current administration will most likely endorse the foreign policies that are in effect. Former members are still considered as members; therefore their opinion will always be prejudiced.   

The president of the other party will also give opinions that will be biased, portraying negativity on the foreign policies but looking at the current economic and political situation both domestic and foreign level, a very acute and critical criticism is required to help get things back on track. Hence proving that opinion of the former president is more credible than the opinion of the former president of the existing administration.