- MUST READS
- PRODUCTS
- RESOURCES
- MULTIMEDIA
- ENFACTLOPEDIA
- FSM AUTHORS
- ABOUT US
- CONTACT US
- FSM BLOG
- DONATE
- PRESS COVERAGE
SEARCH FSM
- IN THIS SECTION
September 24, 2009
Exclusive: Obama’s European Missile Defense Diplomacy – Another Victory for Putin, Another Defeat for the U.S.
As if September doesn’t bring enough reminders of U.S. vulnerability (9/11), we can add 9/17 to the mix – the day we demonstrated to the world we are as feckless a friend as we often denounce France and other nations. Just a few days ago, President Obama – who supposedly ran on the platform of inclusion and sensitivity for others – announced on the 70th anniversary of the Soviet (Russian) invasion of Poland that the United States was pulling out of a previous commitment to place a ballistic missile defense system in their country; a system that not only would protect Eastern Europe but also contribute to the security of the United States. Why? Because Russia was not happy with the notion that U.S. military assets would be on their border. They pouted to Obama, threatened to push back and, well, got angry. I guess it’s fine for Russia to put their menacing military assets on peaceful nations’ borders – but not fine for those nations to be able to counter Moscow’s threat. And the leader of the free world – the one who is supposed to be an honest broker and look out for the interests of the weaker allies – abandoned that role. President Obama has ceded global leadership to Putin and Medvedev. Is that the “change” we can believe in? Is that the “building friendships” candidate Obama promised during his campaign?
“Power perceived is power achieved.”
How powerful do we look when we as a superpower pull out of our commitments to protect a country – Poland – that has reached out to us for help, has stood up for us as a friend and has for too long suffered atrocities from its neighbors, namely the Nazi Germans, the Soviets and the Russians? Commendably, through sheer grit and courage, the Polish were able to emerge from the shadow of these aggressors. In turning to the West for friendship, protection and aid, which for all intents and purposes at least until this last presidential election meant turning to the United States, Poland took a risk – not only from Russia, but from other members of the European Community who aren’t always pro America.
And Poland’s risk was rewarded how? By President Obama embracing Putin and Putin Lite (Medvedev) – caving in to their demands to not place missile defense systems near Russia’s borders.
Last year, the United States made a significant commitment to enhance the security of the United States and Europe, including Poland under President Bush. Ten anti-missile interceptors were to be placed in Poland and with them an American military presence. The Czechs were part of this deal; they would house the system’s radar. This was part of a multilayered missile defense system designed to protect the United States and Europe against long range missiles. We have now conceded part of our security to the fates, courtesy of this Administration.
Poland and the Czechs have lived in the shadow of Mother Russia for too long. Putting a missile defense system in their countries was a chance to remind our allies and adversaries alike that we, too, have a map and know how to use it strategically. Well, that was in the past and President Obama seems all too willing to forget the past. I wonder if the ghost of Santayana could make a visit to POTUS 44 – because a failure to learn from history – in this case Russia’s predilections to use force to control its neighbors – will condemn us to repeat it…..invariably another dark time in the Caucasus, Eastern Europe or wherever Russia (and Iran, and North Korea, and ….) focuses upon, given our reluctance to counter Moscow. Sadly, our allies must suffer for our inability to stay the course or do what is right. So much for U.S. leadership in the world! [According to Obama’s speech to the UN, the days of U.S. leadership seem to be over – ed.]
According to Polish president Lech Kaczynski, the missile project would have enhanced his nation’s security and brought an already close relationship even closer. Moreover, it would have placed an important U.S. military footprint on Russia’s border. President Bush understood the importance of conveying the message, “Two can play at this game.” If Russia can arm, train and build ties with Venezuela and Cuba, we should be able to set up shop in Eastern Europe. Given our sad energy policy, economic challenges, likely multitrillion dollar debt, and inexperienced foreign policy team at 1600 Pennsylvania, about the only wares we have left to offer of any value to our allies is our military. So much for that, given recent events. It is clear, at least based upon all current evidence, President Obama has little regard for or concern about Central and Eastern Europe. Poland wanted our base and presence. At a time when our international military bases are coming under political assault and we stand to lose our foothold in certain parts of Eurasia, with others hanging in the balance or being threatened by new alliances (think Turkey), we cannot afford to lose friends or real estate. Didn’t anyone in the White House ever play Stratego?
Obama supporters argue they will put a bigger Navy presence along with ship based anti missile systems. They are not the same and everyone who can distinguish a sling shot from a SAM knows it, too! And just what body of water were we going to increase our presence? The same one that the Russian navy controls? That ought to make for swell conversation at the yacht club. Reality check….a navy can only extend your influence just so much. At some point, you need a place to dock. Russia understands this, which is why she is reestablishing herself in the Middle East, notably rebuilding the port of Tartus in Syria.
“Never interrupt and enemy when he’s making a mistake.”
If your actions draw praise from your adversaries, rethink what you are doing! The first in line to applaud Obama was Russia. Not too far behind in the cheering section was Germany – a shocking revelation to be sure, given their historic treatment of Poland and the anti-U.S. sentiment that permeates the Fatherland; anything that weakens America’s stature is probably good news for them.
Obama, trying to save face when much of the world reacted negatively to his latest foreign policy act, pointed out that the U.S. isn’t abandoning our allies, just redirecting resources to a more imminent threat (Iran), and promising when the missile defense system is reworked, Poland and our allies will be at the top of the list to get it. Think 2015. I’m sure that makes the Poles sleep better at night. In the interim, Washington promised to put some Patriot missiles in Poland. Even if Obama makes good on the promise, it is a short range system. The old saying “if you toss me a bone, you must think I’m a dog” certainly holds true here. It is a shameful way to treat a friendly nation. And that is the take home message: No longer will the world view the U.S. as trustworthy enough to stand up for friends, to be the global leader, the international big brother that shows up before the bully strikes. For all the muttering much of the world does, when the you-know-what hits the fan, most countries want, need, and count on the US. .to be, well, the U.S….the super power with a moral compass.
Contrast Putin with Obama. Putin is a true leader who will do any and everything to position his nation to finish in first place. In Putin’s world view it is Russia first….period! He is unapologetic, unrepentant and unrestrained. And his endgame is? Simple: rebuild the empire that the West destroyed. Obama, on the other end of the spectrum, seems to apologize for the greatness that is America. His actions are dictated by the need for global approbation. In this latest round of chess between the two world leaders, a task in which Obama is badly outmatched, our rookie president appears to ask permission of Russia before acting. Obama may talk tough but at the end of the day, our president has Russia right where they want us.
Adding insult to injury, Obama goes on suggesting that NATO can still be a viable protector of Poland all the while encouraging NATO to become more aligned with and less adversarial to Russia. If I’m not mistaken, wasn’t it Russia (then the Soviet Union) and the Warsaw Pact that led to the creation of NATO? Russia and her proxies pose a risk to Poland, Eastern Europe and to the interests of the United States. That should be foreign policy lesson number one – Russia is a threat. Everything else makes more sense and can be more readily managed if you follow the tentacles extended worldwide from Moscow to…well, just name the region! Doubt me? Consider it was just a year ago that Russia, unprovoked, invaded a sovereign nation – Georgia. Russia (Gazprom, Putin…terms used interchangeably) shut off the heat to Europe during some of the coldest days over a pricing dispute and, probably, as a reminder not to mess with Moscow. So we can trust Russia to play nice with their neighbors because…? Moscow has brilliantly manipulated, managed and mentored Tehran. The puppet strings over Iran trace back to Russia. Until Washington gets it, any and all of our foreign policy – economic, strategic, and tactical – and our allies are at risk.
Is Obama Right? (Not a trick question this time)
Playing angel’s advocate, let’s look at it from the Obama perspective. Obama needs a foreign policy win. Lord knows the U.S. needs one. He hopes the Iran situation will serve as the great magnet drawing in all our collective attention so that we don’t notice anything else is going on – like Afghanistan, the recent Cash for Clunkers debacle, the ACORN saga, ObamaCare, the trillion dollar stimulus failure and other administration gaffes. By dropping the missile system, which he and his advisors keep yammering doesn’t work anyway, Mr. Obama can get Russia to withdraw their plan to put a missile system on the border with Poland and they might even help us rein in Iran – at which point, the administration claims a victory. But only the weak minded can really accept it as such.
Recall that Russia threatened to put Iskander short range missiles on the borders of the European Union as a response to the ballistic missile defense system we pledged to Poland as part of a multiple component system which included other Eastern European locations. So now, Moscow cheers for Obama, “halts” its plans to place their missiles on the Polish border, and everyone claims victory from Russia to Washington. Assuming through all the euphoria the administration remembers to ask Russia to do something with Iran (Putin to Obama…”we’ll get back to you on that one”), on the surface the Obama plan seems reasonable, right? Only if you are a surface thinker! When dealing with Russia, it is important to read the fine print, nyet? Is Russia totally scrapping the Iskander and other weapons deployment or only temporarily freezing it? Keep a close eye on Kaliningrad and the Baltic region given other measures may come into play including nuclear capable strategic bombers (the Tu-22) and more advanced ballistic missiles.
The administration’s logic only works if you fail to recognize Team Obama’s assumptions are faulty, ignore several critical moves Russia has already played, and overlook the geoglobal aspirations clearly stated by the leadership in Moscow and the emerging cartel of disparate nations unified with a common goal to outplay, outlast and outstrip the United States – what I call the Alliance of Adversaries.
First – the erroneous Obama team conclusion that Iran is concentrating less on long-range ballistic missiles that could reach Europe and more on shorter range ones. The “experts” who came to that conclusion are likely the same ones who said North Korea doesn’t have nuclear weapons and Iran only wants uranium to turn the lights on. Sadly, this administration is less open to dissenting arguments or differences of opinion than the last ones – by a country mile.
Iran has made no secret about their ability to launch a satellite into space using the Safir 2, or their desire to develop heavy payload capable guided missiles. That resulting capability likely takes their missiles way out of the short and intermediate range designation. Their ability to adapt the Shahab or Sejil is impressive. Each one can reach Europe. Whether we’re talking Shahab III, Sejil, or Kadr, Israel is in range and continues to have a target painted on it – either directly from Iran – or its proxy Hezbollah (using the Zalzal). Given the support of China, Russia and North Korean as well as a growing local infrastructure to develop missile and warhead technology – any estimates that it will take Iran 5-10 years before they are capable of deploying nuclear warheads on intermediate and long range ballistic missiles is purely wishful thinking and science fiction. The future threat is closer to now than next decade. The Iranians are spending a hefty amount of their resources in nuclear and missile technology and the ability to defend them. To suggest therefore that Eastern Europe, e.g. Poland, won’t be at risk from Iran for many years as justification for cancelling or withholding the missile defense system is foolhardy, especially given the rapid rate and massive investment Tehran is pursuing missile technology.
Withdrawing the missile defense also belies an obvious lack of perspicacity on the part of our President – not recognizing that the real threat to Poland and Eastern Europe is Russia and by having a U.S. military presence in that region we can keep Moscow off balance.
A scarier proposition is that Obama actually gets it but just doesn’t care because in the end, he is a “one world” appeaser.
At any rate, the Iran theory doesn’t cut it. One would expect the highly publicized successful missile launches this spring as evidence of Iran’s commitment and obvious accelerated time frame. Is Ahmadinejad the only one besides Putin, who understands that the more dangerous are Iran’s toys, the more concessions Tehran is likely to get form the West? Sooner is always better than later for immediate gratification.
Second is the assumption Russia has a vested interest in curbing Iran. On this our leader isn’t the only one drinking the Kool Aid®. German Chancellor Angela Merkel is quoted as saying “I see the decision today (referring to the missile system cancellation) as a very hopeful signal that we can overcome the difficulties with Russia and develop a united front to counter the threat of Iran.” In what language does she need to see “made in Russia” that is stamped on the nuclear technologyin Iran? Iran is Russia’s proxy. Why, except in the short term and only on minor concessions, would Russia hamper Tehran? It has taken Moscow years to nurture the relationship and forge alliances with this nation over energy, weapons, nuclear technology – and in so doing create the source of an open wound for the U.S. Iran is the stick Moscow uses when it needs plausible deniability, and the chip it bargains with to gain ground with nations from which it needs something from – like Israel or the U.S. Recall Israel has been lobbying Russia to withhold the upgraded S 300 air defense system from Iran; such a system would make it nearly impossible for the Israeli Air Force to surgically strike multiple nuclear sites in Iran. Moscow complies – at least for the moment. Israel then sells Russia some UAVs and other technology, while Putin, Inc hold an IOU and weapon over Netanyahu et al. Slick, eh? And we’ve already seen how Moscow used Iran to gain concessions from Washington.
Third – Obama et al want you to think we have scrapped an unproven , expensive system designated for Poland for an out of the box ready, tried and true system. Guess again!
For one thing, the administration has been oh so careful to avoid telling the American public that the missile defense system not only was designed to protect Eastern Europe, but also parts of the United States.
The average person may also be unaware that different threats require different defensive measures; missile defense is not a once size fits all proposition.
Defense Secretary Gates said the first phase of the new missile defense strategy would deploy in the next two years. Though not naming the vital components, he mentions the sea-based Aegis and SM-3 (Standard Missile) interceptors. He’s comparing apples to oranges. The Eastern Europe system was designed to defend against long range missiles. The SM – 3 which Gates implies is a viable replacement is designed for short and intermediate range threats. Even if we buy the Administration’s exhortations that the SM 3 IIA could be deployed rapidly to counter improved technologies – there are two problems with that logic. One, it is in late stage development and two, if it is not in place when the first missile is fired, having it is a moot point.
The administration suggests Turkey and the Balkans are being considered for missile defense. At least they are remembering Turkey is still a friend but one that is increasingly being courted by Moscow. Given our current performance and credibility, Turkey and the Balkans had better hope they do better than the Polish and Czechs.
While we have multiple systems in place and others under development, the ones he mentions are not interchangeable in terms of mission capability. In other words: Our allies, several of our global military installations and parts of the United States will remain vulnerable.
Let’s talk timing…Two years – not exactly an immediate protective capability. He doesn’t mention who would be lucky enough to get the first role out, but does mention negotiations were under way with Poland and the Czech Republic about deploying enhanced SM-3’s by 2015. You can just hear the cheering and sighs of relief in Warsaw and Prague. Gates continues to offer such calming thoughts that our defense systems will be upgraded over the next ten years. The threat is now and our Sec Def is talking about 2019 or 2020? But then he’s the same guy who differed from Admiral Mullen over Iran’snuclearcapabilities. Recently Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Adm. Mullen was asked on a television interview if Iran had enough nuclear material for the construction of a bomb, he answered “we think they do, quite frankly.” This is in stark contrast to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates (also a former CIA Director) who, speaking on a different television program countered, “They’re not close to a stockpile, they’re not close to a weapon at this point, and so there is some time.” Perhaps Gates got his intelligence from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Oh wait, they got it wrong, too! Of note, the IAEA now admits Iran has the information to build an atomic bomb. No kidding!
Nevertheless, where are these future defenses going to be deployed? Alaska? East Cupcake? Perhaps the Baltic? Hmmm, wasn’t that where the ground-based missile defense system was going to be deployed? Which navy has the biggest presence in the Baltic? Anyone have a map at the White House? If Obama is afraid to annoy Putin over ground based interceptors, how will the Kremlin react when U.S. warships are floating in Russia’s bathtub? Not to worry, Vladimir, Barry won’t do anything to upset you. It is likely our Polish friends will receive a box of slingshots dropped from an Air Force C -130 as their likely replacement air defense system.
Israel has had eight months of the Obama administration and recognizes where their protection will come from….Israel! So they are developing an advanced system in addition to continuing a relationship with Washington. Perhaps the Arrow 3 will become a reality for Israel; but given the current pattern of military actions emerging form this administration, would you bet your life as a person or nation on Team Obama? Iran and the radical Jihadists have the ability to deliver if not a lethal blow, certainly a debilitating blow to Israel – without resorting to nuclear or radiological weapons. As evidenced in the 34 day war with Hezbollah (Lebanon) in 2006, the once vaunted Israeli Defense Force is overstretched, and under-funded. Both the IDF and citizenry are tired. Moreover, they know they cannot fight a protracted war.
Nevertheless Israel’s survival is, was and will always be largely predicated upon their ability to defend themselves. Yet no man is an island and Israel must rely upon its few friends and allies. And for the moment the U.S. is still committed to Israel, whatever “commitment” means in the current political environment. Ask Poland what they think “U.S. commitment” means. At any rate, the Arrow 3 might again be available to Israel, if the Administration is to be believed, and the Israelis are developing a new system known as David’s Sling. Given the number of Goliath’s emerging, it is an apt name.
And since it is unlikely that the U.S. will take military action against Iran even if a smoking or glowing gun is found, who will step up? Israel. The wild card and million dollar question – will the U.S. enable, enhance or inhibit the Israelis? If Jimmy Carter’s key advisor Brzezinski – who is still offering his advice – has his way, he’d have Obama shoot down the Israeli Air Force if they overfly Iraq. He recently suggested that course of action.
Fourth – Washington bartered on the notion that the new Russia missile system was a threat. Fact: it was a short-range system. Not harmless, but not worth abandoning allies or giving the world the impression when Moscow grumbles we capitulate. Russia already has an offensive capability in the region beyond the threatened additional missile system. Their ballistic missile arsenal has features that warrant having a missile defense countermeasure. Russia also has other weapons platforms in the region. By threatening to move in a new system that has limited strategic value beyond sitting on the border looking menacing, is mere saber rattling and adds very little to Russia’s already serious capability in the region. But it gives Moscow a bargaining chip when negotiating with a rookie president (BHO) who would gladly accept Russia’s deal in return for scrapping our system in Poland – the fool’s bargain.
Consider the value of each side’s respective actions. Russia loses nothing by giving in and gains a lot in return. The U.S. looks like a weakling abandoning its allies, as evidenced by numerous international newspapers, even those predisposed to supporting Obama, which have denounced his actions. Poland clearly feels abandoned and the ripple effect in terms of the future trustworthiness of our nation in the eyes of our allies is clearly being called into question. Our global stature is weakened and the reliability factor of the U.S. diminishes. Obama not only did not win this latest round, but his actions will surely cost our nation a fair amount of political capital in the coming years as well as global credibility. Russia, on the other hand, continues to come off as an emerging world power; her leaders increasingly look like serious players. Nicely played, Vladimir! And as a bonus, the U.S. also loses part of its foothold in the region. Poland loses additional military support at a time when she needs to gain greater ties and support from the West, especially the U.S., and gets increasingly isolated. Relying upon NATO is hardly a comfort. Russia is patient and will eventually put a leash on its old “protectorate” Poland. This round definitely goes to Russia. And it cost Moscow NOTHING! Just a mere threat and the U.S. blinked.
Add to this the foolishness that our current leaders continue to underestimate everyone. They actually believe Mother Russia is run by oafs or can only pay its bills in winter when the gas flows from Gazprom to Europe. In reality, this is not your old Soviet Union. Russia is spreading money around the world buying up resources, building global alliances from Beijing to Havana, purchasing government instruments and corporations (including US ones) and expanding its military capabilities. Russia has started implementing ambitious plans to revamp and upgrade ALL their missiles within the next 10 years – regardless or in spite of what the U.S. does. These are all actions the United States should also be doing.
Discussion
It is a dangerous and faulty assumption that Putin will reign in Ahmadinejad, out of gratitude that Obama has hit the “reset button” in U.S.-Russian relations by ceding the missile defense system and ostensibly surrendering Poland and/or Eastern Europe as the dowry towards rapprochement with Moscow. The logic upon which Obama’s strategies are founded – geopolitical, economic, military – is flawed. Basing our foreign policy almost solely upon the notion that Iran’s missiles pose the greatest threat and should be countered, and Russia is the one to do it, is both a trap and foolish mistake. Russia is neither our friend nor an honest broker on the world stage. Let’s stop treating her that way. Russia has global appetites. Russia wants to reemerge as a global power – the global power. With oil, gas, natural resources and a network of political, economic and military alliances stretched from the Caspian to the Caribbean Seas, she is not a nation to be trifled with. Her allies are all arming to the teeth. And the U.S.? We’re cutting down our expenses and using political rhetoric to try and cover our trail.
Beyond the utter embarrassment that the U.S. as a superpower has to ask Russia to intervene on our behalf is the reality Russia has a vested interest in the success of Iran and our failure. To be sure, Iran has received missile technology, training and funding from China and North Korea as well as Russia. Some of their missiles are at least partly homegrown but virtually nothing of a provocative nature – from nuclear, military, political, satellite, missile or industrial programs – have evolved without Russia’s direct and ongoing support. It is worth repeating – Russia has directly and indirectly supported Iran in virtually every one of their aggressive actions – from missiles to nuclear capability. It would not be possible for Iran to foment as much terrorism as it does without having a patron, a protector. Tehran is Moscow’s proxy, pure and simple. Iran isn’t selling or giving away Mattel or Hasbro weapons to Hezbollah, Hamas or insurgents in Iraq. They are exporting mostly Russian weapons – often the latest and most advanced ones in the sales catalog. This is big business for Moscow and a source of enormous influence for Iran and Russia in the Middle East.
Ahmadinejad is the new sheriff in town and has Israel, even the moderate Arab nations worried – something that no other Muslim nation or terrorist organization has been able to do. So if you follow the Ruble if not the logic, why would Moscow reign in this highly effective proxy? Especially when every action Tehran initiates undermines the United States, forces capitulation from Middle East entities towards a more pro Moscow stance and increases Russia’s influence. Remind me how Obama’s strategy disentangles Iran’s influence in the world which is largely achieved through the monetary, technological, political and military support of Russia? What doesn’t is garnered by energy sales. Sanctions have been a relative failure. And yet to the surprise and wonder of most of us, Obama persists in believing Russia will magically abandon her global aspirations to reemerge as a super power. It is not a stretch to suggest part of Russia’s influences has occurred because of Middle East energy and terrorism. In actuality Obama’s actions demonstrate U.S. lack of resolve and weakness in a region that respects strength, not weakness.
Recognizing this, Team Obama rush to demonstrate how a new multilayered defense system will be implemented to protect our allies in the Middle East….that would be Israel? Can’t we just name them without being afraid of offending anyone? Secretly and not so secretly, Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia want some protection from Iran – and if that means through Israel, so be it. Nevertheless, do you want to take a guess when these new systems will be up and running?
“If you want peace, prepare for war.” – Sun Tzu
It is more likely that Iran and other adversaries might think twice about threatening the U.S. or our allies and interests if they believed we were serious about protecting our interests. By keeping our commitment and deploying systems across the world, especially in Russia’s and Iran’s backyard, we send a strong message. A multilayered defensive system in concert with a commitment for highly effective response capabilities would be more effective at discouraging Iran and Russia than tucking tail and capitulating. We have misplayed the ability to build alliances within Europe, NATO and nations bordering Russia. We had within our grasp the ability to swing the pendulum or at least slow the shift in power from the Alliance of Adversaries to Team Good Guys. Alas, Obama has undermined our European friendship building by bailing on our allies. So many continents, so little time! Who will Obama alienate next? Taiwan? Japan? South Korea?
And it is unlikely our enemies will suddenly love us because of our actions; disdain and dismiss us but not respect or embrace us.
There’s something far more insidious about the Obama withdrawal of the Ballistic Missile Defense – it is a demonstration of our lack of resolve. Some might argue that by making easy trades we are a more approachable super power – a kinder and gentler super power. One might also get the impression that we live in a safer world. After all, all the big players are talking; only the little guys are on the side lines. If one believes these fallacies, enjoy the fool’s paradise.
Perhaps Obama needs us to feel safe; then when he continues to gut defense spending, the left can expect no one will notice that our nation has become progressively weaker. But who needs to be strong? We’re all friends now, right? Turning swords into plowshares only works when no one is armed and everyone really wants to share. Newsflash…We can’t even get the Bloods and Crypts to disarm – how on earth would anyone expect nations to give up their primacy when street gangs won’t? That’s Human Nature 101 for Dummies.
I could be wrong. But if my perception about global and domestic security was based upon the behavior of my nation’s leader then yes, it would be easy to think all was right with the world. After all, President Obama had the time to go on the Dave Letterman Show and yuk it up with a late night comedian. If the putative leader of the free world can take time out to do the talk show circuit, I guess most of the problems we face in the U.S. are all taken care of – or Joe Biden was minding the store.
The U.S. has a rookie leader whose only management test was running the Harvard Law Review. Russia is led by Putin’s prodigy Medvedev, albeit the true power is in the hands of a seasoned, tested and highly xenophobic professional spy, businessman and politician who has lived in dangerous times and under dangerous circumstances – Vladimir Putin. Putin is used to manipulating situations. He knows much of the world is anxious about Iran’s growing nuclear and missile capabilities. And recognizing Obama wants to restart START – another opportunity for the White House to claim a foreign policy victory – Putin will again throw in a meaningless bargaining chip, like the Iskander system.
Perception is power. And with this latest political misstep by the current administration, once again President Obama demonstrates how he and his advisors are inadequate to the task of playing geoglobal poker or foreign policy chess with the grownups like Vladimir Putin, Ahmadinejad, even Kim Jung Il.
How powerful the U.S. is in 2009 is becoming an increasingly moot point; our ability or willingness to exert our influence or keep in check the appetites of other nations such as Russia or Iran clearly demonstrates the growing global perception that we are in fact paper tigers. While the left continue to wish for a new world order where everyone actually means what they say in terms of global cooperation, peace in our time and the end of international threats, the cold reality is that we’re the only ones who actually seem to believe the rhetoric.
It is clear that President Obama is bringing the United States ever closer to surrendering our preeminence and independence in global affairs. It is apparent he will lead us towards being under the influence of the United Nations. His actions and words indicate he is ceding our global leadership role. The imagery he is creating gives the appearance that we're just another UN member nation, on par with the Congo, Haiti or even Germany, and not the leading democracy in the world. Soon we will be relegated to the role of irrelevance or rubber stamping what the rest of the gang wants. Don't believe me? Consider the thoughts of Poland’s president. Clearly other leaders will follow suit when they look for strategic alliances. In just eight months, Obama has made dangerous strides towards deconstructing the greatness of America – from his domestic policies all but guaranteed to create a generation of dependent citizens instead of self-sufficient ones, to diminishing the image of our nation on the world stage. For an educated man, Obama fails to understand history, and how he and our nation will be remembered under his leadership. It's not looking too good!
It would be a good idea if our military, intelligence and security advisors stepped away from the political arena and re-examined the global chess board for what it is – a place where the U.S. is continuously being surprised, outflanked, outplayed, out-strategized by leaders far more focused than our own. It is a sad day when the sole superpower becomes the 92-pound weakling. Even Clark Kent knew when to be Superman and when to lay low.
Conclusion
The threats that the United States and our (dwindling number of) allies face are many. It is not just the oil wars where we are outplayed. It is not in the growing membership of the nuclear club that we are continuously blindsided by and ineffectual at stopping. It is not just the shifting alliances that spurn our advances for a coalition (Afghanistan for example) or our lack of importance in critical issues – Somali Piracy, Darfur, the growing U.S. sex trade, the internationalization of our urban gangs (Crypts and Bloods with passports), or even the increasing Jihadist fifth column in the U.S. – it is the constant inability to recognize the tremendous strides, growth in power and influence of an important alliance of adversaries created to thwart U.S. interests and expand the influence, wealth and might of its membership. We would be wise to recognize the Hydra before it is too late. The clock is ticking. This alliance of adversaries, led by Russia, includes Iran, Venezuela, China, North Korea, Syria, Libya, and Cuba. Others are on the fence or honorary members.
Nations build alliances, not friendships.
President Obama promised to win America friends, where under President Bush there were supposedly antagonists. Our allies under Obama now neither trust us nor like us. The list of antagonists is growing under our current president – and they were once our friends. Not a good sign and he has only been in charge for eight months! On the other hand, our adversaries have taken great solace in the fact they can tame or outplay our rookie leader. Obama is the Mr. Rogers of the world – “Won’t you be my neighbor?” –and they know it. Putin, Medvedev, Assad, Ahmadinejad and others will continue to easily exploit this administration which is far more concerned about being liked than exerting U.S. influence, ensuring our friends and interests are protected and keeping our adversaries off balance.
Reagan knew how to keep our adversaries off balance. Bush did, too. For all the whining in Europe about Bush, they knew what he stood for and how far he’d go to protect our national interests and allies. The September 17th actions clearly demonstrate how far we’ll go…not!
The current president could have learned a lot from Bush – a man who didn’t apologize for our nation’s greatness, or become overly solicitous about our shortcomings. President Bush made no secret that his job was being the leader of the United States first and the free world second. He was not there to sing Kumbaya. We live in dangerous times. Obama has the luxury of living in a post 9/11 reality. Bush had to live through 9/11. To his credit he enhanced domestic security and rebuilt many of our international military capabilities that were weakened in the Clinton era. Obama will take us back to those ill prepared times. So far, thanks in large measure to the efforts of Bush, we are, at least for the moment capable of protecting the home front. But the O-Team will weaken anything that doesn’t allow for funding his domestic agenda – translation community organizing on a national level. Weapons will be cut if it means domestic programs get more funding.
While it shouldn’t be a zero sum game, given the global threats we face, the sad reality – we don’t have a leader who knows how to tie up all the issues. Putin knows how to tie in economics, wealth and military influence. He understands human nature, regional politics, and how to alternate between using the carrot and the stick. How do you say Teddy Roosevelt in Russian?
Obama fails to see that our security rests in our military and economic strength and our ability to create alliances. As written earlier, developing an Arctic strategy would counter Russia’s Arctic efforts, provide the U.S. with good jobs and provide the opportunity for energy independence. And in the process we would have the ability to fund novel energy programs.
On the 70th anniversary of the Soviet (Russian) invasion of Poland the United States announced it was pulling out of a previous commitment to place a ballistic missile defense system in their country; a system that not only would protect Eastern Europe but also contribute to the security of the United States. Is this the start of a new era of cooperation with the Alliance of Adversaries or another in a long list of missteps by the Obama Administration? The United States is still the sole super power and the preeminent democracy in the world. But nations collapse under their own corruption and carelessness. On the job training for the leader of the free world is neither good for the nation or our allies; we just saw another example of inexperience in action. For the sake of the U.S. and the world, it’s time to rethink our strategy and focus on actions that will enhance the U.S., our allies and our interests.
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Dr. Robin McFee is a physician and medical toxicologist. An expert in WMD preparedness, she is a consultant to government agencies, corporations and the media. Dr. McFee is a member of the Global Terrorism, Political Instability and International Crime Council of ASIS International. She has authored numerous articles on terrorism, health care and preparedness, and coauthored two books: Toxico-Terrorism by McGraw Hill and The Handbook of Nuclear, Chemical and Biological Agents, published by Informa/CRC Press.
Reader Comments: Submit Your Comment (0)
| Print This E-mail This |
|
