Sunday, January 17, 2010

Rating Obama- Part 3 International Relations

The one word that could sum up the first year of the Obama administration is "naive". This administration believes that rational thinking and professorial reserve are effective traits in dealing with the entire world. They are not. Sure, Western Europe can fall in love with him, but their support, if it is present to any degree, is minimal and ineffective. When it comes to dealing with our enemies, specifically radical Islamists, rational 21st Century cool will not prevail.

Let's briefly look at some areas.

Afghanistan:

The Obama administration to add 30,000 troops over the next year is a half baked measure in light of the President's announced plan to begin withdrawing them in 2011 and 2012. First, the president has cut off at the knees his own on scene commander, Gen. McChrystal, who asked for 40,000 troops. Second, he has given the Taliban and al Queda a timetable for them to resume their operations.

Counterinsurgency operations are long term commitments. Obama has demonstrated that he is not willing to make this commitment. For his failure to define an effective strategic position , Obama earns an "F". For their failure to effectively engage the enemy in their assigned areas of operation, our allies earn an "F".

Iran:

Obama has offered a open hand of friendship to the Iranian administration. His efforts have garnered repeated slaps in the face from the Iranians. In dealing with Iran's clear efforts to develop nuclear weapons, Obama is hampered by European weakness and the outright antipathy of both Russia and China. As a result of the positions taken by the latter two countries, it will be impossible to implement effective sanctions. Absent either covert mechanisms to destroy or disrupt the Iranian effort or a massive bombing campaign to destroy nuclear facilities, for the first time nuclear weapons will be in the hands of religious radicals with a 7th century mindset. For his failure to engage the issue effectively and vigorously from the beginning of his administration, Obama earns the grade of "F".


Israel-Palestine:

"Naive". It is the word that best fits the Obama approach to this area of the middle east. Obama has failed to appreciate several realities. Israel is under real and significant threats from entities sworn to her destruction-from the North in the form of Iran back Hezbollah; from the East, with a corrupt and lawless Palestinian Authority and Iran; and from the South, from Hamas controlled Gaza. At this point, Obama might have learned that the Palestinians believe that they can gain everything that they want by continuing to say "no" to any overture from Israel. The initial American position of trying to be an honest broker can not achieve any tangible improvements when one of the parties on the other side believes that it can accomplish more by refusing to negotiate. It is the tactic of the souk. And it can be very effective for them. For its part, Israel fails to play its strongest had, by making life for the Palestinians on the West bank easier, richer and more successful at a faster rate than it has been moving in this direction. There are intractable issues. Israel will never give up Jerusalem and failure of Western powers to understand that the holiest location for Israel-the Western Wall- lies in what would otherwise be Arab Jerusalem. Another non-starter is the idea of making Jerusalem an " international city". Nowhere has this idea worked. Nor will Israel allow the Palestinian refugee families to return whence they came.

Overall, I an tempted to give the Obama administration an "F" , but with the hope that a great degree of learning has taken place this year, I'll raise the grade to "D".

Russia:

After hearing the yapping from Russia, Obama decided to scrap a defensive nuclear missile program that would have placed radars in the Czech Republic and Anti-missile weapons in Poland. In return for undermining our allies, who took undertook a great degree of risk in allowing these facilities to be placed in their respective countries, the Obama administration received nothing in return from Russia. Since these defensive weapons were designed to deter an Iranian threat, one might reasonably expect that the Obama administration would tie the removal o the weapons with Russian support for strong measure to prevent an Iranian nuclear weapon. However, the Obama administration failed in achieving that simple goal. It can be fairly said that the administration surrendered a bargaining chip without securing anything in return. Grade "F".

No comments: