The most serious concern I had about Barack Obama as candidate for President was that his severe lack of experience would be a major handicap, and I always believed this was primarily in the area of foreign policy. While most Americans remain uninterested in foreign policy except on matters of war, the fact is that foreign policy is where Presidents have the most power, and we ought to be more concerned about it when it comes to electing one. Alas, on foreign policy at least, my fears have been borne out. As Mort Zuckerman (hardly a Republican) points out:
Yet, the Iraq war lingers; Afghanistan continues to be immersed in an endless cycle of tribalism, corruption, and Islamist resurgence; Guantánamo remains open; Iran sees how North Korea toys with Obama and continues its programs to develop nuclear weapons and missiles; Cuba spurns America’s offers of a greater opening; and the Palestinians and Israelis find that it is U.S. policy positions that defer serious negotiations, the direct opposite of what the Obama administration hoped for.The reviews of Obama’s performance have been disappointing. He has seemed uncomfortable in the role of leading other nations, and often seems to suggest there is nothing special about America’s role in the world. The global community was puzzled over the pictures of Obama bowing to some of the world’s leaders and surprised by his gratuitous criticisms of and apologies for America’s foreign policy under the previous administration of George W. Bush. One Middle East authority, Fouad Ajami, pointed out that Obama seems unaware that it is bad form and even a great moral lapse to speak ill of one’s own tribe while in the lands of others.
Even in Britain, for decades our closest ally, the talk in the press—supported by polls—is about the end of the “special relationship” with America. French President Nicolas Sarkozy openly criticized Obama for months, including a direct attack on his policies at the United Nations. Sarkozy cited the need to recognize the real world, not the virtual world, a clear reference to Obama’s speech on nuclear weapons. When the French president is seen as tougher than the American president, you have to know that something is awry. Vladimir Putin of Russia has publicly scorned a number of Obama’s visions. Relations with the Chinese leadership got off to a bad start with the president’s poorly-organized visit to China, where his hosts treated him disdainfully and prevented him from speaking to a national television audience of the Chinese people. The Chinese behavior was unprecedented when compared to visits by other U.S. presidents.
Obama’s policy on Afghanistan—supporting a surge in troops, but setting a date next year when they will begin to withdraw—not only gave a mixed signal, but provided an incentive for the Taliban just to wait us out. The withdrawal part of the policy was meant to satisfy a domestic constituency, but succeeded in upsetting all of our allies in the region. Further anxiety was provoked by Obama’s severe public criticism of Afghan President Hamid Karzai and his coterie of family and friends for their lackluster leadership, followed by a reversal of sorts regarding the same leaders.
He has a lot more to say, and I’m afraid that I can’t disagree with any of it. I’m afraid Obama’s critics have the right of it: he’s great at making speeches and at crafting a great image for himself, but so far America is weaker as a world power because of his poor leadership to date. Despite the fervent desires of some of his supporters, acting apologetic and ingratiating does not make America more respected in the world. It tends to do the reverse.

{ 1 trackback }
{ 9 comments }
I read that this morning. Very disheartening. It does have a lot of “some guy in Egypt said” evidence in it, but I’m inclined to believe all of it. Its basic common sense. Most of the world responds to strength. Very little of the world looks favorably on weakness and apologies.
I can tell you this much, if you don’t think our economic situation isn’t making foreign policy decisions quite “weird”, then you are being a wee bit difficult. Strength is fueled by resources. And right now, the American resource engine is sputtering. We are in the throes and the Great Correction. And it has everyone off their game. Previous decisions and avenues are cloudy. We’re in some strange waters my friends and I feel any of this past presidential candidates would be in the same position and getting criticized by Mr. Zuckerman.
Excuse? No. But it is the lay of the land. And regarding the rest of the world, I’m really not listening to a lot of them simply because their sh– stinks at home and they are taking pot shots at us. And President Obama is a juicy target. And Middle East press and leadership really need to shut up since they are perpetuating cycles of destructive behaviors while saying “you don’t criticize your tribe abroad”. Uh and you need to feed and cloth “your tribe”. And how about weaning them away from Islam: Corrupted Edition. Etc….
I don’t know that the waters we’re in are that strange; they look a lot like the late 70s to me, and certainly aren’t as bad as the 30s. I do fear that Obama’s incompetence on the FP front is going to result in some serious warfare over the next decade. I agree with the criticism of middle east “leaders”, but the fact is Ajami is right; Obama is having a crisis of weakness and incompetence, and our enemies (and probably some of our friends) aren’t going to let a good crisis go to waste.
Well I was born in 1974 so I don’t have much visibility in those times. LOL. But I think your probably right about President Obama. You know, President Obama strikes me as the perfect President during smoother times (not saying smoother times aren’t without challenges). But if he was President during the Clinton Years, I think he would have a much more positive impact. Even with the Republican strength during those times. But it is what it is. I hope he can right things in some way. I’m a lot more forgiving of Presidents than some folks are.
It’s like I said — and I don’t mean just “I” (or Dean) said:
There has never been any question in my mind that experience is a very serious issue, most especially when it comes to foreign policy. The problem being–and let me be clear, I have great faith in the American electorate on the whole, especially over the long run–most voters don’t think of foreign policy as very important until something big and bad happens in a pressing, immediate way. Otherwise, when they select their Presidents they mostly do so on domestic issues, where, ironically, Presidents have the least power. Not that they don’t have a considerable amount there, but it’s less than most voters seem to really think about.
Obama has shown multiple times that he’s seriously deficient in this area, and while he picked a pretty experience foreign policy team, it hasn’t stopped him from making some pretty serious rookie mistakes. Every President makes some of those of course, but his number has been high.
Unfortunately, too many of his supporters really seemed to believe what he seemed to believe, that America was “respected in the world until Bush” and that Obama would restore that respect. I don’t think they undestand what “respect” entails. Disliking someone, even mocking them, is not the same thing. The respect that matters on the world stage for a President is that people feel you must actually do things, not just say things. Although doing what you say you will do helps a whole lot too, the point is, it’s not what you say, it’s what you do. Being ingratiating is nice and all but it does NOT garner respect.
Who needs respect when you can have fear.
Nuke the moon!
Even if they are experienced, they are still making a lot of mistakes. (Returning Churchill Bust, DVDs, iPod to Queen, wrong week for Birthday card to Queen [seriously, why do they hate the British?], giving up missile defense on Polish anniversy of Russian invasion, begging for the Olympics, reset buttons for the Russians, acting like he deserved the Nobel Peace Prize, throwing Iranian dissidents under the bus, blowing off Dali Lama, atrocious treatment of Netanhayu well before recent Hamas/Blockade nonesense.
To call these guys experience is like calling a pitcher who is 0-21 a veteren hurler. Technicall it may be true, but they are still just losers.
Some of our learned pundits ought include Hillary Clinton and the Zbigniews in their critiques. Aren’t these the people that are supposed to act as the gatekeepers for the President. At least they should be giving Obama lessons on bowing like when and not to, if ever.
Comments on this entry are closed.