WarSclerotic

Obama: The lion that chirped, Israel Hayom, Prof. Abraham Ben-Zvi, February 27, 2014

(Why would President Obama pay close attention to foreign affairs not immediately affecting the U.S. (except perhaps to provide a welcome and perhaps contagious distraction) when few in the U.S. do so?  He would gain little if any domestic political advantage.– DM)

[I]n the negotiations for a permanent deal with Iran — a major test for American policy overall — Washington has taken a notably conciliatory line with Tehran, supporting continued uranium enrichment. 

Recent weeks have been marked by a flood of events and statements by U.S. representatives that, at least at first glance, showed intent to stop the ongoing decline in the U.S.’s superpower status and offer credibility and relevance in a number of contexts.

But it is doubtful whether any of these declarations will be fulfilled.

It began with U.S. President Barack Obama insisting that his planned meeting with Beijing’s mortal enemy, the Dalai Lama, take place as planned, despite the demonstrations in China. It continued with the U.S. bolstering its forces in South Korea in light of the constant provocations by their irritating northern neighbor (even though there were hesitations about the extent of the move). Finally, of course, there was the explicit warning by U.S. National Security Adviser Susan Rice to Russian President Vladimir Putin about the severe ramifications that could result from Russian interference in Ukraine after the serious events there and the clashes between protesters and security forces loyal to former president Viktor Yanukovych, who has managed to flee.

These were all supposedly key expressions of a new firm, energetic conduct that might indicate a new direction. But on closer inspection it becomes clear that the American sword-polishing does not indicate any significant change to the Obama administration’s basic approach to the international arena.

When it comes to Ukraine, European powers — Germany and France, along with Poland, not the U.S. — were the ones who led most of the diplomatic gambits to bring about a deal with Russia. Not only that, the U.S. warnings to Moscow were general and banal and did not carry any hint of a real intent to take specific steps against Putin in a region that for Russia is part of its traditional zone of influence, directly and indirectly.

Moreover, as with other crises, Obama himself exuded indifference toward what was happening in Kiev, even though the question of democratization and human rights, which stood at the heart of the crisis, is supposed to be close to his heart and at the top of his priorities.

In the other areas that have been foci of international interest these past few days, it also appeared that the steps taken were symbolic (such as the meeting with the Dalai Lama) or mainly tactical (as with North Korea), incapable of changing the global strategic picture. What’s more, in the negotiations for a permanent deal with Iran — a major test for American policy overall — Washington has taken a notably conciliatory line with Tehran, supporting continued uranium enrichment. Meanwhile, the Pentagon’s plans to make dramatic cuts to the defense budget, unveiled this week, could blunt any attempt to show strength and deter enemies and insurgent forces.

Indeed, when the U.S. Army is about to downsize to the numbers of 1940 (before the U.S. entered World War II), the lion’s roar will echo in the international jungle as nothing more than a bird’s chirp, unable to scare off predators. When assertive speech is not backed up and not supported by appropriate military action, it looks hollow and empty.

Obama’s government will be judged, not by its declarations or tactical steps of little meaning, but by its basic policy and plans. These already show a clear goal of unilateral withdrawal from war zones, crises, and tensions. The looming budget cut is a red light, proof that it is yet to be determined whether the American eagle will morph into a white dove. The only thing left to do is to wait and see what global price will be paid when the process is complete.

This entry was posted on February 27, 2014 at 8:58 PM and is filed under Uncategorized. You can subscribe via RSS 2.0 feed to this post's comments. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.