I want to vote in the American Presidential elections

I've heard it said several times that the whole world should be allowed to vote in the American presidential elections, such is the impact a new President will have on the globe. The 2008 elections must be considered historic in several senses. There is a high possibility that America may have a black President... and there is also a chance that before the next Presidential term is over, America could also have a woman in the highest office in the country. Thus a female could end up being the most powerful person in the world. This would be awesome (although I would prefer a black President), but of course, gender shouldn't even be taken into consideration if that person is not right for the job.

That woman is of course Sarah Palin, the Governor of Alaska, who before that was the mayor of a small town. With Senator John McCain being so old and with known health problems, there is a possibility that his running mate could take over before his first term is even up. So you would think you need a Vice-President who is experienced and knowledgable on all subjects, especially in the area of foreign policy. Sure, Barack Obama has been heavily criticised for his lack of experience... but at least he knows what the Bush Doctrine is. I read somewhere that the Bush Doctrine has been considered one of the central elements in foreign policy for the past five or six years (don't have a link, just read it, so not sure how accurate it is).

Thus it scares me that this woman couldn't give a proper answer on a subject that is currently a hot button issue in Pakistan, a country America desperately needs good relations with due to it's proximity to Afghanistan.

In early September, there was outrage after US forces attacked Al-Qaeda militants in Pakistan, near the Afghanistan border. The New York Times reports:

Until now, allied forces in Afghanistan have occasionally carried out airstrikes and artillery attacks in the border region of Pakistan against militants hiding there, and American forces in “hot pursuit” of militants have had some latitude to chase them across the border.

But the commando raid by the American forces signaled what top American officials said could be the opening salvo in a much broader campaign by Special Operations forces against the Taliban and Al Qaeda inside Pakistan, a secret plan that Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has been advocating for months within President Bush’s war council.

It also seemed likely to complicate relations with Pakistan, where the already unstable political situation worsened after the resignation last month of President Pervez Musharraf, a longtime American ally.

Pakistani officials were as expected, not happy. In my opinion, America seems to have no respect for the sovereignty of nations. Opposition MPs actually projected that Pakistan may pull out of the war on terror because of the American attacks.

From the Dawn newspaper,

Robert Hathaway, director of the Asia program at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, said the US has to be careful not to dismiss the help it is getting from Pakistan.

He called the raid by ground forces a ‘risky maneuver’ and said that ‘too many of these operations will make the Pakistani army less willing to work with us,’ which could negatively affect future US leadership.

Pakistan army chief Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani has vowed to protect the country's sovereignty 'at all cost.'

But Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani, talking with reporters late Friday, said Pakistan would prefer to resolve any issue with Washington through diplomatic channels, adding that the issue will be discussed on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly meeting in New York later this month.

'Due to this American policy, the tribal people will join militants and our work will be damaged,’ he said hours after the latest missile strike killed at least 12 people. ‘We will not allow anyone to interfere inside our country.

‘It is not that we will launch any attack. We will try to convince America, we will try to convince Britain that they should respect the sovereignty of Pakistan, and God willing, we will be able to convince them.’

So to have a woman, who could be the next President of America, giving such an ambiguous answer on such a vital question, should raise alarm bells amongst the American populace.

But sadly, I don't believe elections are ever won on foreign policy. They're won on domestic issues, on what the candidate can offer the average person. On tax cuts, welfare and social issues. Americans will be much more likely to critique Sarah Palin on the illegitimacy of her soon-to-be-born grandchild than her ability to execute proper foreign policy decisions.

That is where democracy stuffs up. But we would be in a worse place without it.

P.S. For those who haven't realized because of the indulgance of media coverage into the US elections, there is actually a federal election brewing in Canada. Prime Minister Stephen Harper asked the Governor General to dissolve parliament and called an early election. He is trying to get more support for the conservatives in the minority government. I read that it is not projected that his Conservative party will win enough seats to get the majority.

UPDATE: Even Presidential candidates are prone to gaffs. Here's Senator John McCain talking about an "Iraq-Pakistan" border. Simple mistake I guess. Senator Barack Obama apparently signalled that he would consider intervening in Pakistan if the government could not properly handle Al Qaeda militants in the hills between Pakistan and Afghanistan.