Note:  I do not agree with all these points and  particularly take 
exception 
to views expressed in parts of #7 and # 8, but the summary is well worth 
thinking about.   -BR
 
 
Commentary
 
Counting Up Obama’s Cataclysmic Foreign Policy  Failures
 
Peter Wehner  05.26.2015 


 
 
With the Islamic State expanding its reach after two key victories in 
Ramadi,  the capital of Iraq’s Anbar Province, and Palmyra, a strategically 
important  city in Syria, it might a good time to ask: What are the worst 
foreign 
policy  failures of Barack Obama’s presidency? The list is long; here are 
several to  choose from. 
1. The Rise of ISIS. President Obama failed to anticipate the rise  of 
ISIS, which he ridiculed as a “_jayvee team_ 
(http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/01/27/going-the-distance-2?currentPage=all)
 ” as recently as last year, 
and  he has since failed to do anything effective to impede it. ISIS had 
established  territory in large parts of Syria and Iraq; it now “_controls a 
volume of resources and territory  unmatched in the history of extremist 
organizations_ 
(http://blogs.cfr.org/davidson/2014/07/24/isis-hasnt-gone-anywhere-and-its-getting-stronger/)
 .” Under Mr. Obama’s  watch, a jihadist 
caliphate has been established in the heart of the Middle East  — and the 
president has no strategy to deal with it. 
2. Losing the War in Iraq. President Obama’s predecessor handed to  him a 
war that had been won. Don’t take my word for it; take the word of Mr.  Obama 
and his vice president. On December 14, 2011, in welcoming troops home at  
Ft. Bragg as he was ending the American presence in Iraq, the president 
_declared_ 
(https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/12/14/president-obama-fort-bragg-welcome-home)
  “we’re leaving behind a sovereign,  stable and 
self-reliant Iraq.” It was, the commander-in-chief said, a “moment of  
success.” A 
year earlier Vice President Joe Biden put it _this way_ 
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLteUGkvpOc) : “I am very optimistic about 
Iraq.  I think it’s 
going to be one of the great achievements of this administration.”  All our 
hard-earned achievements were undone by the president’s determined  commitment 
to withdraw all American troops from Iraq during his presidency. He  did 
what he was determined to do and, as a result, Iraq is collapsing and Iran  is 
rushing in, increasing its influence to an unprecedented degree. 
3. Failing to Aid Iran’s Green Revolution.  In the summer of  2009, a 
revolution in Iran threatened to topple the mullahs. Leaders of the  so-called “
Green Revolution” _pleaded for support_ 
(http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/318891) . They got none.  President 
Obama, in _saying_ 
(http://articles.latimes.com/2012/oct/22/news/la-pn-fact-check-debate-green-revolution-20121
022)  he “want[ed] to avoid the United  States being the issue inside Iran”
, did nothing to aid the pro-democracy  elements that were seeking to 
overthrow the Islamic theocracy.  Whether our  assistance would have altered 
the 
course of events is impossible to know — but  the president, in essentially 
casting his lot with the Iranian regime during its  most vulnerable period 
since the 1979 revolution, ensured the democratic  uprising would fail. And 
with it, our best chance of the Middle East cleansing  itself of the most 
malignant and dangerous regime on earth. 
4. Triggering a Nuclear Arms Race in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia  has 
long advocated a Middle East free of nuclear weapons. But President Obama’s  
determined effort to strike a deal with Iran, in which all the important  
concessions are made by us and none by the Iranians, has petrified our  
traditional Sunni allies in the region. Fearful of Iran, nations like Saudi  
Arabia, 
Egypt, Turkey and others are now considering and/or preparing to acquire  
nuclear weapons. Saudi Arabia’s former intelligence chief and ex-ambassador 
to  Washington, Prince Turki al Faisal, _declared in March_ 
(http://www.wsj.com/articles/saudi-arabia-considers-nuclear-weapons-to-offset-iran-1430999409?
mg=id-wsj)  that whatever Iran gets  in its nuclear deal with the United 
States, “we will want the same.” Ibrahim  al-Marie, a retired Saudi colonel 
and a security analyst in Riyadh, put it this  way: “Our leaders will never 
allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon while we don’t.  If Iran declares a 
nuclear weapon, we can’t afford to wait 30 years more for our  own—we should be 
able to declare ours within a week.” The president’s  effort to strike a 
deal with Iran, then, is triggering a nuclear arms race in  the world’s most 
volatile region, with the risks of nuclear war increased by the  threat of 
terrorist groups acquiring radioactive material. 
5. Erasing the “Red Line” in Syria. In 2012, President Obama _said_ 
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxxwfaIAl_Q)  Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad — 
who 
 the previous year was referred to as a “_reformer_ 
(http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/11/clinton-no-longer-a-believer-that-assad-is-a-reformer-
says-he-cant-sustain-the-armed-opposition-in-syria/) ” by Secretary of 
State Hillary  Clinton — should step down and that the use of chemical weapons 
by the Assad  regime against rebel forces would constitute crossing a “red 
line.” Mr. Assad  crossed the red line, and President Obama did nothing. The 
brutal Syrian leader  is still in power, Syria is being torn apart by a civil 
war in which _around a quarter of a million people have  died_ 
(https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/file_attachments/bp-failing-syria-unsc-r
esolution-120315-en1.pdf) , around four million have fled as refugees, and 
around eight million  have been internally displaced. Syria’s neighbors are 
being destabilized. And an  unmistakable message of weakness was sent by Mr. 
Obama and received by every  adversary and ally of the United States: Mr. 
Obama’s words and threats are  worthless. 
6. The Failure to Arm Syrian Rebels. As Syria began to unravel, in  2012 
then-CIA director David Petraeus and then-Secretary of State Hillary  Clinton 
_developed a plan_ 
(http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/03/us/politics/in-behind-scene-blows-and-triumphs-sense-of-clinton-future.html)
  to vet Syrian rebels 
 and train a cadre of fighters who would be supplied with weapons. The plan 
was  supported at the time by Leon Panetta, who was defense secretary, and  
Martin Dempsey, who was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. But it was  
ultimately vetoed by President Obama, _according to Mr. Panetta_ 
(http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/08/us/politics/panetta-speaks-to-senate-panel-on-benghaz
i-attack.html) . The president was  worried about becoming more deeply 
involved in Syria. That hasn’t worked out  very well, though. America is not 
only involved in Syria; we have launched  military airstrikes against it and 
Mr. Obama has proposed a major program to  train and arm moderate Syrian 
rebels, though it’s likely too late to influence  events on the ground. It’s 
impossible to know if the Petraeus plan would have  succeeded when it was 
proposed three years ago. But what we do know is that  today, with America 
taking 
a hands-off approach, (a) Syria has become a  humanitarian and geopolitical 
catastrophe and (b) we have been drawn into the  conflict. 
7. Libya Collapses and Becomes a Terrorist Safe Haven. On March  19, 2011, 
President Obama unilaterally authorized the U.S. military to begin “a  
limited military action in Libya” to protect Libyan civilians. He _said_ 
(https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/03/19/remarks-president-libya)
  by 
intervening in Libya’s civil war,  he was acting “in the interests of the 
United States and the world.” Six months  later, during a September 21, 2011 
speech to the United Nations, President Obama  _declared_ 
(http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0911/64026.html) , “Forty-two years of 
tyranny was  
ended in six months. From Tripoli to Misurata to Benghazi — today, Libya is  
free… Yesterday, the leaders of a new Libya took their rightful place beside 
us,  and this week, the United States is reopening our embassy in Tripoli. 
This is  how the international community is supposed to work — nations 
standing together  for the sake of peace and security, and individuals claiming 
their rights.”  Since then — and in good part because of the lack of American 
follow through and  engagement — we have closed our embassy. Syria has been 
_declared a terrorist safe haven_ 
(http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/crt/2013/224828.htm)  by the  State Department. 
No central authority exists. The Libyan 
state has collapsed  and is being torn asunder by civil war. _According to_ 
(http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/25/world/africa/libyan-unrest.html?ref=world
)  the New York Times,  “the violence threatens to turn Libya into a pocket 
of chaos destabilizing North  Africa for years to come.” An intervention 
Mr. Obama once hailed as a model now  lies in ruins. 
8. Russian Aggression in Crimea and Ukraine. In 2009, Secretary of  State 
Hillary Clinton hailed the “_Russian reset_ 
(http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co
m/2009/03/06/clinton-reset-button-gift-to-russian-fm-gets-lost-in-translation/) 
.” It was said to be a  “win-win” situation for both sides. It hasn’
t worked out quite that way. The  United States scrapped a missile-defense 
system the Poles and the Czech Republic  had agreed to house despite Russian 
threats, as a way to pacify Russia’s  Vladimir Putin. In return, Russia has 
reasserted its presence in the Middle East  in ways unseen since the 1970s, 
propped up the Assad regime in Syria, supported  Iran’s nuclear ambitions 
and its repression at home, invaded Crimea, militarily  intervened in 
Ukraine, and given safe haven to Edward Snowden. During Mr.  Obama’s watch, 
Putin 
has “position[ed] contemporary Russia as the heir to the  Russian Empire as 
it was constituted under the czars,” _according to_ 
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/after-carving-up-ukraine-where-will-putin-turn-next/2014/05/09
/17b86398-d623-11e3-95d3-3bcd77cd4e11_story.html)  the Russian American  
journalist and author Masha Gessen. That is what the “Russian reset” looks 
like  in real life. 
A few summary thoughts on all this: There are limits to America’s capacity 
to  influence world events. It’s difficult for even the best presidents to 
deal with  an untidy and sometimes uncooperative world. And in some of the 
examples I’ve  cited, President Obama is more responsible for the failures 
that have occurred  than in others. But in each of these instances Mr. Obama 
has made things worse,  and in most cases he has made things markedly worse. 
The cumulative and  convulsive effects of his failures are extraordinarily 
damaging to America and  the world. 
President Obama, in _describing_ 
(http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/29/us/politics/obama-foreign-policy-west-point-speech.html?_r=0)
  his foreign policy 
doctrine in  private conversations to reporters, said, “We don’t do stupid 
sh*t.” He  actually does, quite a lot, and in ways that may be unmatched by 
any president  in our history. Over the course of his presidency, Mr. Obama 
has implemented the  policy he’s wanted. As a result, in several nations and 
in some regions, he has  helped open the gates of hell.

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to