President Barack Obama’s foreign policy of appeasement has made the world a much more dangerous place.
After taking office by proclaiming America’s faults and weakness in a 2009 international tour, Obama began to greet each crisis with empty threats and promises.
He has also continually shifted the “red lines” that would trigger action.
His goal to hit the “reset” button of relations between the U.S. and Russia earned him the praise of Russian President Vladmir Putin.
In return, Putin invaded Crimea, backed rebel fighters in Ukraine, and supported dictators in Syria and North Korea.
Pressure from Russia also reduced the level of sanctions against Iran, which has vowed to use its developing nuclear powers against the U.S. and Israel.
Has Obama had any successes at all? Let’s take a look:
• The Taliban is patiently awaiting our exit from Afghanistan so militants can resume torture of citizens and cooperation with al-Qaeda operatives.
In the interim, our troops are immobilized by rules of engagement that make it impossible for them to stabilize the country.
• Too bad our president didn’t listen to top military leaders and leave a stabilizing force of U.S. troops in Iraq so a giant threat from the Islamic State wasn’t allowed to emerge. By the way, military advisors are elite combat troops. So, having the president portray them as anything else to justify putting boots on the ground is disingenuous.
• Arming Syrian rebel forces to deal with the IS threat is risky business. The weapons we give many of these fighters are just as likely to land in enemy hands.
• Relations with Israel, our traditional ally, are at an all-time low as the tiny nation fights for survival from neighboring countries that have promised its destruction.
• There is not enough room in this column to portray the disaster of our immigration policy in regard to U.S. border security.
During a time of global crisis, there needs to be a firm leader at the helm of the world’s greatest superpower.
National security decisions should not be made by someone who bases every action on the direction of that day’s political wind.
America needs to rethink its reliance on military solutions.
We carry a big stick and sometimes we need to use it. Sometimes we get it right, as we seemed to do in Kosovo and most recently in Afghanistan.
Sometimes we get it wrong, as when we invaded Iraq. Sometimes we do nothing when it seems we should, as in Syria. And sometimes we offer unconditional support to those who seem unwilling to work out a true solution, as in Israel.
Necessary or not, the war against terrorism has done nothing to reduce the number of terrorists willing to kill.
Indeed, terrorists have increased both in number and brutality. War, while effective in fighting an immediate threat, is a poor medium for long term change.
War and peace. Hawk and Dove. Balance. These are the keys to truly effective foreign policy.
We have great power in the war department, but outside the realm of world health our nation’s formal role in the promotion of peace is sadly lacking.
The Peace Corps, with its bipartisan support and mission to “promote world peace and friendship” is the obvious counterbalance. Its goals are simple:
• To help the people of interested countries in meeting their need for trained men and women.
• To help promote a better understanding of Americans on the part of the peoples served.
• To help promote a better understanding of other peoples on the part of Americans.
Sadly, the Peace Corp budget and policy has not kept pace with the need. In a 2003 policy paper by the Brooking Institute titled “Reconsidering the Peace Corps,” author Lex Reiffel suggested a number of ways to increase effectiveness, independence and the volunteer pool. These included policy changes to “articulate a goal that would more effectively counter the perception that the United States is seeking to extend its dominant position in the world at the expense of other countries and cultures,” service strategies that would be more attractive to skilled applicants from a greater range of age groups and working more cooperatively with host countries, some of which fear the Corps as a potential tool for propaganda and American influence.
War and peace. Hawk and Dove. Balance. These are the keys to truly effective foreign policy.
Commented
Sorry, there are no recent results for popular commented articles.