[SNN] Obama's Game, by S. Trifkovic

[ANTIC.org-SNN]

http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/2012/02/13/obamas-game


Obama’s Game


by Srdja Trifkovic <http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/author/srdja-trifkovic/>  
• February 13, 2012 • Printer-friendly 
<http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/2012/02/13/obamas-game/#printpreview> 

 

I was away in Europe when President Obama delivered his third State of the 
Union Address, hence a belated commentary.

 

Obama’s carefully crafted speech sounded more like the opening shot in the 
reelection race than a set of serious policy proposals. His “blueprint for the 
future,” which supposedly will bring about a new era of social and economic 
revival, was vague and—significantly—contained no reference to the reduction of 
the $17 trillion debt. His insistence that an economic recovery is finally 
under way was misleading and predictably mendacious.

 

In view of his ideological and cultural preferences, it was irritating to hear 
Obama muse on “the American Dream” and call for “a return of American values of 
fair play and shared responsibility.” His demand that “Wall Street plays by the 
same rules as the rest of the country ... with no bailouts, no handouts, and no 
cop-outs” made it sound like he had nothing to do with the biggest bailout in 
the history of the world. He blamed the bankers, China’s unfair trading 
practices and his predecessor for the high unemployment rate, while taking 
credit for the modest improvement of recent months.

 

On the foreign front—according to Obama—“the United States is safer and more 
respected around the world. For the first time in nine years, there are no 
Americans fighting in Iraq. For the first time in two decades, Osama bin Laden 
is not a threat to this country. Most of all, Al Qaeda’s top lieutenants have 
been defeated. The Taliban’s momentum has been broken, and some troops in 
Afghanistan have begun to come home.”

 

The most significant foreign event of the past year has been the misnamed Arab 
Spring, heartily supported by the Obama Administration, which has changed the 
geopolitical equation in North Africa and the Middle East to America’s 
detriment. The United States is not “safer” with the predictable triumph of the 
Muslim Brotherhood and its various affiliates in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya, and 
America will be even less safe if the relentless campaign against the Syrian 
regime is ultimately successful. Although clear to everyone but Obama, Muslim 
countries that oppose autocratic regimes stem not from secular reformers, but 
from true believers who accuse those regimes of betraying the “True Faith.”

 

As for the “respect,” Obama’s support of the regime changes in Cairo, Tripoli, 
Tunis and Damascus has not improved America’s standing in the Arab world. This 
is unlikely to change in view of his statement that “[o]ur ironclad 
commitment—and I mean ironclad—to Israel’s security has meant the closest 
military cooperation between our two countries in history.” In fact, an 
“ironclad commitment” of this kind is unhealthy for both parties.

 

“There are no Americans fighting in Iraq,” but Obama has failed to mention the 
sharp escalation of violence and all-pervasive instability in the country 
following the withdrawal of American troops. The manner of that withdrawal 
displayed an unsureness of touch, and a full-blown civil war remains a distinct 
possibility. Iraq has been a disaster for the United States, Iraqis, and the 
stability of the region. Obama’s undignified disengagement—too late to stop the 
deaths and suffering, too early to secure stability—has created a more volatile 
situation, which in the long run will be more detrimental to U.S. interests. 
Unspoken proxy wars by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) have 
secured the greater degree of control over Iraq ever since the Persians ruled 
Mesopotamia. We saw a similar result in Lebanon.

 

Obama’s claim that “the Taliban’s momentum has been broken” is belied by the 
December 2011 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Afghanistan, which warned 
that the “gains” have been undercut 
<http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-intel-afghan-20120112,0,6949277,full.story>
  by “pervasive corruption” and that the war is still essentially a stalemate. 
The NIE also concluded that the Taliban remain undefeated and determined to 
re-impose their brand of Islamic rule on the country. It should be known that 
the NIE is the consensus view of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), as well 
as 15 other agencies and is more trustworthy than Obama’s rosy assurances. 
Moreover the “State of the Taliban”—a classified NATO report 
<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-02/intelligence-doesn-t-support-obama-s-upbeat-view-of-afghanistan.html>
  based on interrogations of thousands of captured Taliban prisoners—seems 
equally more credible than Obama’s declaration. Once the coalition withdraws, 
“the Taliban considers victory inevitable,” according to a BBC excerpt of the 
report.

 

On Iran, Obama declared that “[t]hrough the power of our diplomacy, a world 
that was once divided about how to deal with Iran’s nuclear program now stands 
as one. The regime is more isolated than ever before; its leaders are faced 
with crippling sanctions; and as long as they shirk their responsibilities, 
this pressure will not relent. Let there be no doubt: America is determined to 
prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, and I will take no options off the 
table to achieve that goal.”

 

It is ironic that our Nobel Laureate President is seemingly unable to grasp the 
strategic logic of the Iranian bid for the bomb and prefers to parrot George W. 
Bush’s mantra that “all options” must remain open. Instead of threatening a 
military action against Iran with no clear exit strategy and at a prohibitive 
cost to our core interests, Obama would be well advised to engage Tehran in 
bilateral diplomacy based on an offer of U.S. security guarantees to Iran in 
return for a rigorous supervision regime and a formal pledge that Iran refrain 
from developing nuclear weapons. A reasonable agreement is possible, but 
Obama’s language offered no assurances that it will be sought or reached.

 

The most depressing part of Obama’s speech was his repetition of Madeleine 
Albrigtht’s mantra that “America remains the one indispensable nation in world 
affairs” (“as long as I am President I intend to keep it that way”). Such 
millenarian hubris has cost America and the rest of the world dearly over the 
years. Another war is to be greatly feared by year's end.