During the debate, Clinton said she would “pick and choose” people she would listen to, not listen to or listen to in certain areas. It’s important for voters who care about foreign policy whom she would pick in this particular area: The choice is between ensuring the continuity of Barack Obama’s current policy, which leans toward the Soros point of view, and going back to a version of the Clinton-engineered, failed “reset” of U.S.-Russian relations during Obama’s first term.

Sanders is often criticized for being nebulous on foreign policy, but, despite his friendly history with Russia, he is clear and coherent on the Russia policy he wants to pursue. It continues the recent Obama line. Sanders said at the debate on Thursday.

“I happen to believe that Putin is doing what he is doing because his economy is increasingly in shambles and he’s trying to rally his people in support of him. But bottom line is: The president is right. We have to put more money. We have to work with NATO to protect Eastern Europe against any kind of Russian aggression.”

And in Syria, Sanders believes Putin is trying to buy time to ensure a victory for President Bashar Assad.

Clearly, as the senator said, he will not be taking advice from Henry Kissinger. He probably even missed the elder statesman’s Moscow lecture.

Clinton, considered to be a foreign policy expert, is harder to read on Russia. I, for one, have no idea what to expect of her. That’s the disadvantage of her deflection at the debate, saying she would listen to different people about different things. If she subscribed to one foreign-policy adviser’s school of thought, she could say so and we would know what that entailed.

Bershidsky is a Bloomberg View columnist based in Berlin.

Love 0 Funny 0 Wow 0 Sad 0 Angry 0