The New York Times published a piece on Romney's purportedly erratic foreign policy positioning. The article's basic premise is that Mittens' foreign policy team is internally divided, between a segment that differs little from the current Administration and the hardline John Bolton faction who live in a fantasy land where it's always 2002 and freedom is just a massive bombing campaign away. In typical journalistic fashion, the author avoids the obvious: Romney's supposedly schizophrenic stance is mere politicking.
The befuddled candidate is in a tricky situation since the President has turned out to be just as militaristic as his predecessor. In order to distinguish himself, Romney needs to up the warmongering, to go even bigger than the President. And if you want to out-crazy someone on foreign policy, you can do no worse than listen to Bolton's idiotic ideas. But, if Romney were to actually win, his foreign policy would look a lot like post-2006 Bush. Which is to say his foreign policy will be no different than that of the Obama Administration.
That his policy team seems to not understand this very simple strategy probably attests more to their own lack of political acumen than that of the candidate.