Democratic debate was heavy on foreign policy

Deliberations mark a far more aggressive shift in the party’s primary race for US presidential election

Aday after the Paris attacks, it was natural that the issue of terrorism would feature prominently at the US Democratic presidential debate. The pointed comments by the prospective candidates marked a far more aggressive shift in a primary race that has kept up its civility compared to the Republican contest.

Frontrunner Hillary Clinton found herself fending off questions from Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley, not just about her foreign policy but also her views on the US’ economic ties. She cast herself as a strong commander-in-chief and sought to defend her role in the situation in the Middle East.

The debate also revealed a foreign policy split within the Democratic Party, with Sanders playing to the anti-war activists.

The session at Drake University was originally supposed to focus on the economy, but the terrorist attacks in Paris changed that. The parry and thrust continued over other issues as well — gun control, Libya and national security.

But the candidates also agreed on some issues. They echoed one another in calling for a war against extremists, agreeing for the need for better intelligence, better use of military resources and the need for a closer partnership with the US allies.

While the candidates might have got out of another debate with a few discussions, questions still abound on what the eventual winner will do in a particular foreign policy situation. It is one thing to look back at some of the events on the world stage, and another completely to look ahead and see how to tackle world issues, given the complexities they cover.