- MUST READS
- PRODUCTS
- RESOURCES
- MULTIMEDIA
- ENFACTLOPEDIA
- FSM AUTHORS
- ABOUT US
- CONTACT US
- FSM BLOG
- DONATE
- PRESS COVERAGE
SEARCH FSM
- IN THIS SECTION
June 23, 2009
Exclusive: When It Comes to Foreign Policy, Can Obama Think On His Feet?
Presidential Policy: Does It Make the Grade?, James Carafano, PhD
Not surprisingly, Iran and North Korea dominated national security discussions in Washington last week. Also, true to form, the response of the administration continues to appear “ad hoc” and ambivalent.
Events in Tehran and Washington are clearly moving faster than White House policy. Iran’s Supreme Leader declared the election valid and ordered demonstrations to end. The next day protests continued and violence escalated. Much of the global pushback against the regime appears to be driven by what is often called Web 2.0, social networking tools like Twitter, You-Tube, Flickr, and Facebook. Heritage Scholars have written on the national security implications of these technologies before and discussed how they are impacting events in Iran. In “The Iranian Elections and Public Diplomacy 2.0: A Tale of Untapped Potential,” Heritage’s Helle Dale wrote that while the Obama administration has been quick to adopt these new technologies during the campaign on the White House Web site, “if the political will is not there to project a positive message in defense of political freedom and values that the United States has promoted for decades, it will matter little how effectively this new media is used.”
At the same time, back in Washington there seem to be problems as well. While both chambers of Congress passed resolutions overwhelming supporting the people of Iran, according to the New York Times, the president continues to resist calls for a harder stance against the regime. “President Obama should drop the guarded language that suggests he is triangulating between the regime and its opposition and come down off the fence and on to the side of those fighting for freedom and democracy in Iran,” concludes Middle East expert and Heritage Senior Fellow James Phillips. There is no question but the White House “deer in the headlights” approach to events makes the president look more like a bystander than a global leader.
Meanwhile, North Korea presses on with its ballistic missile and nuclear testing program. The White House response has been puzzling. On the one hand, they appear to be finally taking the threat of long-range missile tests much more seriously. The White House and Defense Secretary Gates virtually ignored the last test – not even deploying a critical sea-based radar in Hawaii or placing ground-based missile defenses on alert. This time around, Secretary Gates went out of his way to say he would rely on U.S. missile defenses. “The ground-based interceptors are clearly in a position to take action,” Gates said. ‘So without telegraphing what we will do, I would just say, I think we are in a good position, should it become necessary to protect American territory.” That about face – not only saying the defenses were important, but admitting he had confidence that they would work – was made even more curious by the fact that while Gates was lauding missile defenses on one hand, the administration backed House Committee effort preventing restoring massive cuts to the missile defense budget.
At the same time, the U.S. declared it wants to inspect North Korean ships suspected of carrying missile components or nuclear technology, but admitted that boarding these ships could only be “voluntary.” In an interview on CNN, I pointed out that the North Koreans could well side-step these inspections and make the U.S. appear even weaker.
Looking at the events of the past week, it is clear the President is at his strongest in addressing national security issues when the White House can orchestrate events, such as his recent trip to Europe. He appears less sure in dealing with rapidly developing world events.
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor James Jay Carafano, Ph.D., is a leading expert in defense affaires, intelligence, military operations and strategy, and homeland security
at the Heritage Foundation. Feedback: editorialdirector@familysecuritymatters.org.
Reader Comments: Submit Your Comment (0)
| Print This E-mail This |
|
