nonniey Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Interesting column from Newsweek. The column is a bit more damning of the former National Security Advisor General Jones than it is for Clinton and Panetta (who imo are just a culpable). http://www.newsweek.com/2011/02/13/wanted-a-grand-strategy-for-america.html "“The statesman can only wait and listen until he hears the footsteps of God resounding through events; then he must jump up and grasp the hem of His coat, that is all.” Thus Otto von Bismarck, the great Prussian statesman who united Germany and thereby reshaped Europe’s balance of power nearly a century and a half ago. Last week, for the second time in his presidency, Barack Obama heard those footsteps, jumped up to grasp a historic opportunity … and missed it completely. In Bismarck’s case it was not so much God’s coattails he caught as the revolutionary wave of mid-19th-century German nationalism. And he did more than catch it; he managed to surf it in a direction of his own choosing. The wave Obama just missed—again—is the revolutionary wave of Middle Eastern democracy. It has surged through the region twice since he was elected: once in Iran in the summer of 2009, the second time right across North Africa, from Tunisia all the way down the Red Sea to Yemen. But the swell has been biggest in Egypt, the Middle East’s most populous country. In each case, the president faced stark alternatives. He could try to catch the wave, Bismarck style, by lending his support to the youthful revolutionaries and trying to ride it in a direction advantageous to American interests. Or he could do nothing and let the forces of reaction prevail. In the case of Iran, he did nothing, and the thugs of the Islamic Republic ruthlessly crushed the demonstrations. This time around, in Egypt, it was worse. He did both—some days exhorting Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to leave, other days drawing back and recommending an “orderly transition.” The result has been a foreign-policy debacle. The president has alienated everybody: not only Mubarak’s cronies in the military, but also the youthful crowds in the streets of Cairo. Whoever ultimately wins, Obama loses. And the alienation doesn’t end there. America’s two closest friends in the region—Israel and Saudi Arabia—are both disgusted. The Saudis, who dread all manifestations of revolution, are appalled at Washington’s failure to resolutely prop up Mubarak. The Israelis, meanwhile, are dismayed by the administration’s apparent cluelessness........" Click Link for the rest of the Article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 This article is utter and complete nonsense that starts with the comparison of Bismark (a German) riding a wave of German nationalism to create a unified German state to Obama's need to do the same to create a, 'er, unified Arab, 'er, ah, what exactly? No POTUS, Dem or GOP would be able to do much better than Obama's response as this scenario is something of a Kobayashi Maru. If Obama had immediately backed the demonstrators only to see the protests put down, then what does he say to the Mubarak regime and the Saudis/Israelis that he's just P.O.'d? Conversely, if he'd backed the regime to keep the Saudis and Israeli's happy and the Mubarak govt. fell anyway, he's just alienated Egypt's future govt. as well as the other Arab protestors. The nonsense continues with the author's discussion of similar "mistakes" in the handling of the Iran protests. So what course of action does the author recommend? That we should enact economic sanctions? Oh wait, we've already done that because of their pursuit of nukes. So what should have been the response then? Bomb them? Invade? What? Moreover, given our role in the overthrow of the legitimately elected Iranian Prime Minister (Mossadegh), how "helpful" would it really be for us to be seen meddling in Iranian affairs again? Doing so would likely have played right into the Mullah's hands and swayed Iranian popular support away from the demonstrators. Obama's response was pretty much correct-he hedged his bets. I suspect a President McCain would have (correctly) done much the same. The real test of the administration will be how it handles things in the coming months and years. Sorry, but this article is long on nonsense and short on actual analysis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 I think the President and our federal government as a whole was wise to stay the heck out of it and should consider doing that much, much more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Yeah, it's their country why do some many on the right think we should have done something (though I didn't hear much of what) to impact the outcome one way or the other? The (apparently unrecognized) arrogance of presuming we should have had something to do with it is a big problem for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Yeah, it's their country why do some many on the right think we should have done something (though I didn't hear much of what) to impact the outcome one way or the other? The (apparently unrecognized) arrogance of presuming we should have had something to do with it is a big problem for me. because somehow the neo-con thinks that intervention is the policy that makes sense, even when all evidence to the contrary is right in front of their eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deejaydana Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 I'll give Niall Ferguson this, he's an impressive historian. Not sure that translates into an effective politican however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonniey Posted February 14, 2011 Author Share Posted February 14, 2011 I think the President and our federal government as a whole was wise to stay the heck out of it and should consider doing that much, much more. Where do you all get the idea we stayed out of the situation in Egypt? Did you miss this part? ..." This time around, in Egypt, it was worse. He did both—some days exhorting Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to leave, other days drawing back and recommending an “orderly transition. The result has been a foreign-policy debacle. The president has alienated everybody: not only Mubarak’s cronies in the military, but also the youthful crowds in the streets of Cairo........ ” That said the real point of the article is not what happened in Iran or Egypt those were just symptoms of not having a Foriegn Policy strategy or the priotizing that that allows. Do any of you think he really has a strategy (Be it grand or not)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 I happen to think that Obama's election, his handling of US-Muslim relations, and his speech in Cairo have all meaningfully contributed to current events in Egypt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 And Nonniey how do you or the author of the Newsweek article know Obama doesn't? After all, none of us are privy to the conversations behind the scenes. As for an overarching strategy it is often difficult to know what it is until after the fact when such issues can be more openly discussed. However in the short-term, Obama's hedging P.O.d both sides some but avoided burning bridges allowing for the relationship to be repaired after everything was decided. What would you suggest be done differently? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 That said the real point of the article is not what happened in Iran or Egypt those were just symptoms of not having a Foriegn Policy strategy or the priotizing that that allows. Do any of you think he really has a strategy (Be it grand or not)? Yes indeed. It includes things like inspiring young people in the Muslim world to ask for a better government, building relationships with Russia and China to put pressure on Iran, and many other very beneficial pragmatic aspects. (It also includes not screwing good things up. Government in Iran, for example, would have LOVED us giving them an excuse to violently put down those protests) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellis Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Why the hell is Obama expected to chime in on Egypt or Iran at all? We Americans have a hard enough time getting him to stay focused on us. Let the Egyptians and Iranians take care of themselves. What are we, in charge of the world? or ourselves? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 I know I'm an Obama supporter (some say apologist), but even with that said, I did not find this article compelling in the least. Obama had to walk a tightrope between supporting the aspirations of the masses in Egypt and recognizing the real politik risks of abandoning or undermining our existing non-democratic allies over there. I think he did reasonably well on that impossible job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 I'm NOT an Obama supporter, but I thought this article was complete b.s. Obama made the right statement at the right time - that both sides should settle their differences peacefully. This made the thuggish actions by the police force more embarrassing and convinced the army not to resort to force. There's little else we could or should have done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.