David Karki

I know I’m probably tilting at windmills, but I’m going to see if I can decipher anything close to an understandable foreign policy from President Obama by comparing a list of Middle Eastern countries that have recently seen upheavals. We should also ask ourselves why we’ve seen so many in such a short time that all seem to follow a pretty similar pattern. I, for one, don’t think that’s merely coincidence.

Nor do I think Obama’s seemingly schizophrenic and incoherent positions are simply a result of a small man holding an office far too big for him – though that’s certainly a factor. There is more to it than that.

But first things first, a summary of the conflicts:

Afghanistan – The U.S. invaded after 9/11 since the Taliban had harbored the perpetrators and masterminds of that evil slaughter of nearly 3,000 innocents. Obama played this up during the 2008 campaign, so as to look tough while advocating surrender and withdrawal in Iraq. Now as president, Obama is making no real effort to live up to all that talk or to win or even accomplish any recognizable or definable goal. A country that had made some progress – considering that it had made none in its entire history since being part of the ancient Persian Empire, which is likely why the Taliban and Al Qaeda were so fond of it – could well slip back into that abyss.

Iraq – Obama ripped BOOSH! BOOSH! as a candidate and petulantly continues to do so to this day, even as he simultaneously becomes the Flaming Hypocrite In Chief by blundering into Libya. (More on that in a moment.) In 2003, President Bush in had a larger coalition behind him, sought and received Congressional approval first to comply with Constitutional requirements, and had a legitimate national interest  –  changing the strategic equation in our favor by providing a magnet for drawing terrorists to face the world’s best military halfway around the world rather than continuing to attack unprepared, unarmed civilians on our own shores as occurred on 9/11/2001.

Seeing as Saddam Hussein was one of the biggest murderous monsters in history, and that he had repeatedly violated the terms of the 1991 Gulf War cease fire and multiple U.N resolutions – not that President Clinton or the U.N. itself gave a damn or were ever going to do anything about any of it – there was more than enough grounds for making his evil dictatorship be the one to draw the golden Wonka ticket in the ass-kicking sweepstakes. (Apologies to Dennis Miller.)

Iran – The most oppressive and insane regime in the region and perhaps the world shot its own citizens, to put down the one legitimately pro-western, pro-democracy uprising of the group. Thousands of courageous young people took to the streets, ready to die for freedom. Quite a few tragically did, and the world saw the bloodshed on YouTube. Sadly, and unconscionably given that Candidate Obama said exactly the opposite during the 2008 campaign, President Obama was nowhere to be found when a small push in the right place at the right time might just have rid us of Ahmadinejad and his quest for nuclear bombs once and for all, and replaced it with a friend and ally.  A chance for a major transformation was missed, and we may well pay for it with the detonation of a nuclear bomb that kills millions. And those young people in Iran pay for it daily.

Egypt – Hosni Mubarak, a dictator in the classic Cold War “he may be a bastard, but at least he’s our bastard” style, was challenged by many of his own population. With scarcely a thought given, much less an effort made, to find out exactly who these agitators were and what they would portend, Obama immediately demanded Mubarak leave. Never mind that Egypt is the home of the extremist Muslim Brotherhood, and that it was most likely them leading the uprising, as evidenced by the brutal gang rape of CBS reporter Lara Logan, amongst other things.

Even if it initially was a legitimate pro-western movement ousting Mubarak, it might not be strong enough to keep the Brotherhood from co-opting it and filling the resulting power vacuum.  Obama recklessly disregarded these considerations of what would come next and the possibility it could be even worse, and simply presumed that those in the streets carried legitimacy. (A presumption that he’d obviously never give a million Tea Partiers on the National Mall demanding that he get out of the White House.) And now, it appears as if the Muslim Brotherhood is in fact gradually filling that vacuum.

Libya – After ripping President Bush without end, Obama promptly did all those same supposedly awful things all the more. He went into a country where there is no current national interest, with a smaller coalition, and without first obtaining Congressional approval. Obama has now launched an “illegal, immoral, unconstitutional” war of his own, and cornered the market on rank hypocrisy in the process – but only after dithering and hesitating long enough to lose the one chance to shove Qaddafi over the edge with minimal involvement and loss of life. Now Qaddafi has hunkered down and found enough of a defense that he could last quite a while and cost us quite a lot to force him out.

At least President Bush managed to actually hunt down and fairly quickly get rid of a monstrous killer of thousands and put Saddam hanging at the end of a rope; Obama can’t even manage to decide if he wants to get rid of a total clown of a dictator who killed hundreds in two terrorist bombings some 25 years ago, and was still so scared of Reagan’s retaliation 17 years later that he immediately gave up his nuclear program when Bush went into Iraq. And forget about actually doing it – that’s someone else’s problem.

To be sure, Qaddafi has a long-overdue and much-deserved  ass-whipping coming his way for Lockerbie, and to quote Ivan Drago in Rocky IV:  “If he dies, he dies.” But Obama has given him every chance to ensure he’s never served with that punishment. In which case, it would have been better off never to have gotten involved at all.

Obama is managing to make America look more impotent than 83-year-old Hugh Hefner before a bowlful of Viagra pills, and weaker than the historically surrendering French. This is profoundly damaging to America’s standing and prestige for which the entire world will suffer, and to the office of the presidency in a way that Clinton’s intern sex games don’t even begin to approach.

Syria – We’re now seeing rumblings in Damascus, and who knows where that will lead? Given all that the Assad regime has done to unofficially take over Lebanon via its terrorist allies in Hezbollah, attack Israel by proxy, as well as buddy up to Saddam’s Iraq in the past, it would be hard to fathom that anything or anyone worse could take their place. If there is a chance to topple it, we’d be foolish not to seriously consider taking advantage. But it doesn’t appear that Obama is in any hurry to make Assad go away the way he was Mubarak.

So what conclusions are there to draw, and what patterns are there to all this? Insofar as the source of the uprisings go, especially in Egypt and Libya, the best guess would be that they appear to be part of an overall effort by those such as the Muslim Brotherhood or Al Qaeda for whom a strongman who can be bought or influenced by the west simply isn’t a pure enough Muslim, as they attempt to build a single Islamic entity stretching from northwest Africa to central Asia. That would obviously not bode well.

But even if that’s not the case, it’s pretty clear that in each of these countries – save possibly for Iran’s young masses – we have two pretty awful options to choose from and neither is really any good. It doesn’t say much for Islam or redeem it well that this is all they can manage to offer. As America tries to determine which option is the least bad, it would serve us well to keep that in mind.

And as for Obama, his seemingly incomprehensible flip-flops – i.e. if Egypt and Libya are so clear, how in hell could he not get rid of I’m-A-Nut-Job and his potential nukes when he had the chance and unconscionably ignore those gutsy young Iranians yearning to be free of the mullahs when they were desperately pleading for help while being shot? – and blatant hypocrises – i.e. Iraq and evil, Libya wonderful – it’s actually pretty clear.

In each country, he has consistently supported either the most anti-American or pro-radical-Muslim option available. Afghanistan? Play it up to get elected, then sandbag the effort. Iraq? Rip it from the outset, and let Saddam stay. Iran? Ignore the mullahs’ oppression and let Ahmadinejad get nukes. Egypt? Shove Mubarak out at the earliest incident even if the Muslim Brotherhood would step right into power. Libya? Get rid of Qaddafi.…well, sort of.  Syria? Let Assad stay.

When you combine Obama instinctively supporting anyone who opposes America with his incompetence, indecision, and utter fecklessness – and it’s not an either-or proposition; Obama can easily mean to intentionally do wrong and still be an arrogant, bumbling fool of a teleprompter-reading empty suit at the same time – it’s a staggering thing to contemplate.

Yes, Obama is treasonous enough that he means to wreck America and aid her Muslim enemies, but he’s also such a total moron that he’ll screw it all up. Speaking of two awful options to choose from, neither of which is any good…

One can only hope that things don’t get significantly worse before November 2012, when we Americans will have the chance to force our own unpopular strongman from power.

3 Responses to “Obama’s Foreign Policy? Support the Enemy”