Candidates offer voters no choice on Iraq policy

Last night's presidential debate pitted George Bush against John Kerry on the issues of national security, terrorism and Iraq - issues that, almost certainly, will decide the election. Yet, for all the claims of deep differences, in many respects the foreign policies of the two candidates are very similar.

Last night's presidential debate pitted George Bush against John Kerry on the issues of national security, terrorism and Iraq - issues that, almost certainly, will decide the election. Yet, for all the claims of deep differences, in many respects the foreign policies of the two candidates are very similar.

On almost every major issue - Iraq and Iran, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, North Korea and relations with Russia and China, as well as trade and other international economic issues - the President and his challenger have far more in common than they might care to admit.

The dominant issue last night was set to be Iraq. Both men claim to have plans to resolve the conflict, each says the other's approach is a recipe for disaster, and each distorts his rival's proposals almost beyond recognition. For Mr Bush, the Democratic challenger is a defeatist, changing his views from day to day, lacking the resolve to "see the mission through," and who would have preferred that Saddam Hussein stayed in power (though Mr Kerry has only said that the 2003 invasion has merely traded one mess with another).

For his part, Mr Kerry accuses the President of lacking a clear strategy, and of living in a world of make-believe and spin, which refuses to acknowledge just how grim is the reality on the ground. But their actual policy prescriptions have a great deal in common.

Realistically or otherwise, both say they will enlist greater international help in restoring security in Iraq, and rebuilding the country's shattered economy. Both say the key is to train up enough Iraqi troops and police to take charge of security. Both are adamant that the US cannot cut and run. Unlike Mr Bush, the Massachusetts senator has set a target date for withdrawing American troops by the end of his first term. He insists however that is not a deadline set in stone.

But Mr Kerry's "four point plan" for Iraq, set out earlier this month, has failed to make a significant impact. Though he accuses the President of lacking a coherent strategy, polls suggest voters believe Mr Bush, not Mr Kerry, is the man with a plan - a tribute perhaps to the former's ability to "stay on message," repeating the same generalities in the same words, over and over again.

The approaches to the Middle East conflict are also similar. Mr Bush has been arguably the most pro-Israeli president of modern times. But Mr Kerry has expressed total support for Ariel Sharon, and backed construction of the deeply controversial "fence" that physically separates Israel from Palestinians on the West Bank.

Both men vow to halt Iran's nuclear programme. Both favour close relations with China. The real cleavage is in style. Mr Kerry is counting on foreign antipathy to Mr Bush to make his job much easier once he enters the Oval Office.

Traditional American allies who have baulked at assisting the unilateralist and high handed Bush White House over Iraq will be more receptive to requests from a more conciliatory Democratic administration, Mr Kerry's advisers say.

But he must walk a fine line, arguing he is better able to repair America's image in the world, yet defending himself from charges he is selling out US interests to an ungrateful world.