Ukraine appears to be on the brink of war. This after Russia more or less took Crimea and is staging anti-Ukrainian demonstrations in the eastern part of the country. Obama’s response to all of this has been economic sanctions on seven Russians and lofty rhetoric about the world’s position or something. In Syria, our President’s red line was ignored. The President’s response was to make threats and back down. Obama supported the Arab Spring in Egypt and cheered when the Muslim Brotherhood overthrew a long time ally. He has since done nothing despite his pals in the Brotherhood being thrown out of power. In Libya, terrorists murdered our ambassador and the President’s response is to lie about why they did it and then do absolutely nothing.
Looking at Obama’s foreign policy it’s easy to wonder what exactly his foreign policy is. The President seems to react to world situations and his reactions usually aren’t very good. Obama portrays a certain weakness unusual for an American President. He retreats to following “world” opinion rather than trying to shape world opinion. He doesn’t have any noteworthy foreign policy successes. Not even with countries such as Venezuela which boasts the sort of socialism Obama seems to like. Obama hasn’t achieved peace in the middle east or even moved things in that direction. Syria, Ukraine and Egypt have been abject policy failures.
Obama rarely talks about foreign policy unless he’s reacting to an event. He never comes right out and says what is overriding foreign policy objective is. Woodrow Wilson was quite clear what his objective was when he tried to push the League of Nations. FDR was equally clear when he demanded unconditional surrender and a United Nations. Eisenhower and Kennedy were clear when they demanded communist containment. Reagan was clear in his desire to collapse the Soviet Union and eliminate nuclear weapons from the Earth. There isn’t any question as to what Bush 43’s foreign policy was.
So what exactly is Obama’s? He never quite comes out and says what his end game is. Surely the smartest man ever to live in the White House has an overall foreign policy goal that he’s trying to move the nation towards. What it is never seems to be stated. Obama always appears to be reacting, which gives him the aura of foreign policy incompetence. Because he always appears to be reacting to world events, Obama always seems like he doesn’t quite have a point. He comes off like he’s speaking off the cuff. This of course requires us to think the best of President Obama.
There is of course another theory on Obama’s foreign policy that must be discussed. Before becoming President Obama seemed to want American power abroad limited. He wanted our influence curtailed, especially in the middle east. The people he has surrounded himself with throughout his life think America is the problem child in the world. With this theory in mind, his refusal to issue any meaningful economic sanctions against Russia makes sense. His half asked effort to sanction seven Russians was only worth a headline in the papers to appease Americans. His backtracking in Syria demonstrated to the world the sort of weakness Obama wants for America. His decision to follow the French in Libya makes more sense, as does his willingness to throw long time allies under the best. It all demonstrates a weaker America in the world.
Most Americans don’t want to think this way about their President. It’s much preferable to believe Obama is incompetent or a good meaning but naive man. However in looking at Obama’s five plus years in office, it’s hard to believe incompetence and naivety are completely responsible. Especially so when you look at the socialist cast of characters around the President. He keeps company with the likes of Valerie Jarrett who believes America is the problem, to say nothing of others over the years. The problem with Obama isn’t that he holds this position, it’s that he refuses to articulate it so the public can judge it for themselves. Rather than strongly arguing his case, Obama doesn’t trust the public or its response.
Leo McNeil 