The New York Times asked the remaining 2020 Democrat presidential candidates to fill out a questionnaire on their foreign policy views and how they would handle certain situations.

Out of all of the candidates, most of whom answered all 36 questions or close to it, one stuck out for refusing to answer the majority of questions: Pete Buttigieg.

Buttigieg, a radical leftist who is often falsely portrayed as a moderate, refused to answer the following questions from The New York Times:

Is there any situation in which you could see yourself using American troops or covert action in a regime-change effort? If so, under what circumstances would you be willing to do that?

Is it appropriate for the United States to provide nonmilitary support for regime-change efforts, as the Trump administration did in Venezuela?

Regarding possible future military action against Iran, is there any type of response that is off the table for you?

Would you continue the personal diplomacy President Trump began with Kim Jong-un?

Would you tighten sanctions until North Korea has given up all of its nuclear and missile programs?

Would American troops be in Afghanistan at the end of your first term? If so, would you limit those troops’ mission to counterterrorism and intelligence gathering?

Would American presence in Afghanistan be dependent on other nations contributing troops on the ground?

How long do you envision American troops being required, in any numbers, in Afghanistan?

Should the United States maintain its current level of military aid to Israel? If not, how should the level of aid change?

Should all Palestinian refugees and their descendants have the right to return to Israel?

Do you support the establishment of a Palestinian state that includes West Bank land as demarcated by pre-1967 borders, except for longtime Israeli settlements?

Should Russia be required to return Crimea to Ukraine before it is allowed back into the G-7?

Should respect for Hong Kong’s political independence, under the terms of the handover agreement with Britain, be a prerequisite for normal relations and trade with China?

Should normal relations and trade be contingent on China’s closing its internment camps for Uighurs and other Muslim minority groups?

Should NATO nations pay more for defense than their current commitment of at least 2 percent of G.D.P.?

Should nations that do not fulfill their NATO funding commitment still receive an assurance of United States aid if they are attacked?

Should a presidential order be required to launch a cyber strike against another country, just as it is required to launch a nuclear strike?

The United States Cyber Command’s new strategy is “persistent engagement,” meaning the U.S. goes deep inside foreign computer networks to constantly engage with adversaries and dissuade strikes on the United States. Would you continue this policy?

If you answered yes to the last question, would you nevertheless insist that other nations pursuing “persistent engagement” could not be inside American power grids and other critical infrastructure?

The Washington Free Beacon noted that Buttigieg did not answer a single question asked by The Times about China, U.S. cyber policy, NATO, or Afghanistan.