Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich speaks to supporters at a kick-off party for the opening of the Newt2012 office in Manchester, N.H., Friday, Nov. 11, 2011. (AP Photo/Winslow Townson)

(CNSNews.com) – As the Republican presidential hopefuls prepare for a foreign policy debate on Tuesday evening, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s poll surge following a string of strong debate performances will place him – and his foreign policy positions – at center stage.

Judging from positions stated during the primary campaign, a President Gingrich would be significantly tougher than the incumbent in responding to Iran’s nuclear activities.

During Saturday’s CBS/National Journal debate in South Carolina, Gingrich said the Obama administration has “skipped all the ways to be smart” in dealing with Iran and its nuclear ambitions.

He called for “maximum covert operations to block and disrupt the Iranian program, including taking out their scientists,” “maximum coordination with the Israelis,” and the development of a strategic program deploying “every possible aspect short of war of breaking the regime and bringing it down.”

If in the end those actions were not successful, he said, then the military option would be needed:  “You have to take whatever steps are necessary to break its capacity to have a nuclear weapon.”

Gingrich as president would be more skeptical of the view that the consequences of the political upheavals underway in the Arab world will be beneficial overall for the U.S. and its allies’ interests in the region. Among other things, Gingrich has questioned the administration’s decision to “abandon” Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak on one hand and what he regards as its “soft” approach towards Syrian President Bashar Assad on the other.

Hinting at how different a Gingrich administration’s foreign policy would look to the current one, the candidate said in reply to a question at a Manchester, N.H. appearance on Monday that former ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton represented the type of “tough-minded” person he would want as secretary of state.

Gingrich in the Oval Office would take a much colder view of the U.N., having recently described it as “clearly a corrupt organization” and called the Obama administration’s commitment to multilateralism through the world body “nothing more than appeasement.”

President Obama’s heavy investment in engagement with the U.N. has not reaped the benefits that may have been expected, in the opinion of Gingrich (and most of the other GOP presidential contenders).  The recent election of Pakistan and Azerbaijan onto the Security Council for 2012-13 – both beating candidates more desirable from a U.S. perspective – is expected to add to the difficulties ahead, particularly when dealing with the challenges posed by Iran.

Another pressing foreign policy issue for all the candidates, and one certain to feature again in Tuesday’s debate, will be what to do about Pakistan and its ambivalent response to terrorists.

After the death last May of Osama bin Laden – tracked down to a compound near Pakistan’s top military academy – Gingrich questioned the billions of dollars in aid provided by the U.S. to Islamabad.

He did so again during Saturday’s South Carolina encounter, arguing that when it comes to foreign aid to countries like Egypt and Pakistan, “you ought to start off at zero and say, ‘Explain to me why I should give you a penny.’”

“The Pakistanis hid bin Laden for at least six years in a military city within a mile of their national defense university?” he continued. “And then they got mad at the people who turned him over to us? And we think those are the acts of allies? I think that’s a pretty good idea to start [foreign aid] at zero and sometimes stay there.”

In contrast to Obama’s outreach to the Islamic world and cautious use of language when it comes to the nature of the global terror threat, Gingrich’s campaign platform calls for a unified “grand strategy for marginalizing, isolating, and defeating radical Islamists across the world.”

The platform also calls for military force to be “used judiciously and with clear, obtainable objectives understood by Congress,” and Gingrich has argued for the swiftest possible troop exit from Afghanistan – “as rapidly as the generals think is safe.”

On the other hand, liberal commentators accused him of giving contradictory responses to Obama’s decision to withdraw all troops from Iraq by year’s end, and Tuesday night’s debate may provide the opportunity for Gingrich to clarify his position on the issue.

Other declared foreign policy priorities for Gingrich include a drive for energy independence; securing the border to prevent terrorists from entering or smuggling weapons into the U.S.; and boosting America’s education system – especially math and science education – to strengthen U.S. competitiveness and ensure that its troops “always have the most advanced and powerful weapons in the world at their disposal.”

Tuesday’s debate in Washington, D.C., will be broadcast by CNN and is being hosted by the Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute.