America’s
policy towards Ukraine has been remarkably consistent and bipartisan through successive
Republican and Democratic administrations.

The pillars
of U.S. policy are: Promotion of a democratic and economically independent Ukraine
that is able to escape from authoritarian Russia’s shadow; encouragement of
Western integration; and support for exchange programs that send Ukrainian
students to American high schools, universities and that allow them to work in
the U.S.

The Sept.
22 unanimous resolution of the U.S. Senate attests to this unanimity. It’s a
rare day when anything so meaty gets approved by a chamber of Congress with 100
percent support. But all 100 senators went on record and put President Viktor
Yanukovych on notice about human rights abuses. They demanded the release of
ex-Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko and raised the prospect of punishment for
those responsible for her imprisonment and other human rights abuses.  

If anything,
U.S. policy towards Ukraine could be characterized as a sort of benign neglect
or likened to the relationship one might have with a distant relative who lives
far away – warm, cordial, but not particularly explosive or at the top of the
priority list.

And Ukraine
is not likely to be a top American priority anytime soon, as the U.S. works to solve
its own enormous problems economically and politically. For the foreseeable
future, the Middle East and Asia are likely to trump Europe, the former Soviet
Union and Latin America as the focus of U.S. foreign policy.

But America’s
choice on Nov. 6 should be looked at more broadly because the next president
will affect the whole world. For that reason, Democrat Obama clearly deserves a
second four-year term in office.

Romney has
scored his most credible points against Obama in foreign policy by criticizing
the administration’s “reset” of relations with Russia. Obama does, in fact, appear
to have done little to help curb the imperialistic and human-rights abusing excesses
of President Vladimir Putin.

Consequently,
Putin remains a menace to his own people and to his neighbors, including
Ukraine. It appears that Obama has decided that the U.S. needs Russia’s
cooperation too much on Iran, Afghanistan, Syria and other hotspots to spoil
the relationship with pointed criticism of Putin. Romney also rightly chastised
the administration for abandoning a missile-defense system that Poland sought
over the Kremlin’s misguided objections.

However,
Romney comes up short in almost every other category needed to be a successful
president in the 21st century. And his ridiculous notion that Russia
remains America’s top geopolitical threat shows that his mind is stuck somewhere
back in the Cold War.

Worse,
however, is that Romney is an unprincipled man who is willing to say anything
or, it seems, do anything to make a buck.

The
Huffington Post, for instance, last month dove into the tobacco industry’s
archives – which became public after a landmark lawsuit against the industry –
and discovered that Romney’s Bain & Company made millions of dollars
advising British American Tobacco on how to brand and market their products
more successfully.
As a result, more Ukrainian women and children started
smoking; the smoking rate among men remained among the highest in the world. This
is evidence of a man who doesn’t care what he does to hurt – or prematurely
kill – other people, as long as he cashes in.

Romney would
be a bad president in almost every other way as well.

He holds to
a simplistic and outdated world view. He is not likely to surround himself with
advisers who will take seriously the need to understand the complexities of other
countries in order to make bilateral and global diplomacy effective. He seems
prone to blundering and blustering America into another misbegotten war, as
Republican George W. Bush did twice with his neo-conservative advisers.

Romney’s economic
policies of tax cuts for the rich, budget cuts for the poor and no regulation
are a prescription for another global economic recession of the kind Bush Jr.
delivered.

As anyone
in Ukraine during the 2008-09 global downturn knows, when the world catches a
cold, Ukraine gets the flu. This nation’s currency lost 40 percent in value,
its exports suffered and credit dried up. This nation has still never fully
recovered.

Obama
offers the most reasonable and enlightened path to progress, both in the United
States and globally.

Despite
opposition from Republicans, Obama managed to craft economic policies – such as
stimulus spending, bailouts of the financial and auto sector and new
regulations — that mitigated and shortened Bush’s recession. The global
economy is in a fragile state but recovering, no thanks to intransigent
Republicans.

Obama has
also managed other global hotspots well, considering that Americans are loathe
to go to war against anybody now, Syria and Iran included.

When it
comes to this part of the world, we hope a second Obama administration will
indeed support the Sergei Magnitsky bill that is making its way through
Congress. It’s wrong to oppose this legislation as the administration appears
to be doing. We hope for a law that allows the United States to freeze the financial
assets and deny visas not just to those in Russia who abuse human rights, but
also to individuals in Ukraine and elsewhere in the world.

 At this point, sanctions may be the best way
to get the attention of the world’s authoritarians. Such sanctions would
require help from many European nations whose banks welcome stashes of cash of
suspicious origin from Ukraine and other places. The end to excessive banking
secrecy and offshore havens is a movement political leaders, including Obama, should
be supporting.

We also
hope that a second-term Obama administration will actively press Ukraine’s
leaders at all levels to release political prisoners, to create democratic
institutions that everyone can respect and to act in the public interest. We
also hope he keeps the effective U.S. Ambassador John F. Tefft on the job in
Kyiv as long as possible.

But
engaging with Ukraine’s leadership won’t be enough.

America
must continue to bypass Ukraine’s leaders with generous financial aid that
helps Ukraine’s best and brightest students and other potential leaders escape
the dead-end economy in Ukraine and work and study in America. Over time, enough
of these educated minds will return and transform Ukraine for the better.  Continued funding for these programs will take
intense lobbying, given America’s likely deficit-reduction measures in the
future.

This race
shouldn’t be decided by one or two pet issues. Although I’d like to see more fire and a bigger vision from the president in the next four years, Obama’s overall course is far preferable
for America and the world. This race also shouldn’t be as close as the polls
show.

Obama has
demonstrated character and competence in the last four years.

By
contrast, Romney has demonstrated that he’ll change his position on anything to
gain power. He rides the the wave of support from too many Americans
who will vote for him – even if it means voting against their self-interests economically. They’re not going to find respect from a Romney presidency either. As he showed in remarks to a private fundraiser, the Republican candidate has contempt for 47 percent of Americans — hardly something people should want in a president.

Others will simply cast their ballots for the white guy in the race. The Obama haters in America — and there are too many — simply don’t want him to succeed, even if the country suffers for it.

I was very
proud of my country four years ago for not just electing the nation’s first
black president, but for picking the better candidate in the 2008 presidential race.
I was in Washington, D.C., that day and, yes, cast my ballot for Obama.

I expect to
be equally proud of my country on Nov. 7.

Kyiv Post chief editor Brian Bonner can be
reached at [email protected].