Foreign Policy without Strength

The economic meltdown that the US is feeling right now is going to be long and painful as the business world comes to realize that President Obama’s policies are distinctly anti-business, anti-growth, and decisively anti-private sector. This has a good part of the country reeling for the shock of 401Ks, IRAs, and 529s, not to mention the stock and options in their own companies plunging. But for a moment let’s put the global financial crisis on hold and look at something that hasn’t been getting as much attention, a dramatic shift in foreign policy.

Rahm Emanuel, Hillary Clinton, and President Obama have all said that a crisis is a terrible thing to waste. Unfortunately those who consider themselves our enemies were listening and agreeing. President Obama has backed off of the “missile shield” that was revived and pursued by the Bush administration. This is the evolution of what was once known as SDI or the Strategic Defense Initiative. It was a crippling technological blow in the arms race with the Soviet Union during the Cold War and one of the main reasons Gorbachev conceded in vast arms reduction agreements. At the time the US was only proving the theories behind the program, which President Reagan envisioned would be a series of satellites that would protect EVERY country on earth, even the Soviet Union. What was once spaced based, is now a terrestrial based network, with actual proven systems being installed in different places around the globe. The idea is similar to the proven Patriot systems that became a CNN favorite during the first gulf war. High on the list are eastern European NATO and former Soviet block countries that fear an increasingly aggressive Russia, combined with a nuclear armed North Korea, and a nuclear ambitious Iran.

Unfortunately the few budget cuts that President Obama has been eyeing are centered around defense spending. The missile defense shield in particular seems to be on the chopping block. For eastern European nations that watched Russia roll into Georgia during the summer, this can’t be very comforting. President Obama’s new tone and policy toward Russia appears to endanger their very safety and sovereignty. Nations that still have the memories of Soviet rule cringe at the prospects of a resurgent Russia under the ambitious Putin. President Obama showed little understanding of the area as a candidate and even less discernment of Putin’s intentions. The currently friendly gaffe’s at ‘resetting’ US/Russian relations and a retraction of commitments on the missile shield tell the world and Russia that the Obama administration will accept a position of weakness in any negotiations. Hardly the trump card that played so well for President Reagan.

On the Korean peninsula, President Obama’s team appears almost indifferent to North Korea’s intent to launch a “peaceful satellite” into orbit. The reality is that they appear to be running a test on a new long range rocket, in violation of a useless UN Security Council resolution.

Iran as well has been establishing a long range missile program with help from the Russians. This is also a concerning development when combined with the near completion of their first nuclear weapon.

Doesn’t a missile shield sound like a good idea about now?

Continuing their overtures of a desire to negotiate from a weakened US stance, President Obama mentioned that we need to appeal to the moderates in the Taliban to help bring about peace in Afghanistan. A local official who worked with the Taliban and now with current President Karzai was dumfounded by the thought that any moderates existed in the radically Islamic Taliban organization. By their very definition they are radicals.

In the meantime, while Cuba is in a state of potential transition with the eminent death of Fidel Castro who currently holds sway over the government through his aging brother Raul, President Obama is talking of lifting sanctions against the country. Wouldn’t the lifting of sanctions be a great tool and popular selling point for an anti-communist opposition that may have a chance with Fidel’s death and an aging and apparently more moderate Raul? Why cut off the one leg that they may have to stand on?

I once heard then Senator Obama described as “Jimmy Carter without the wisdom”. With President Obama taking strength out of our position on foreign policy, that statement may be more true than the joke it was meant to be.

Obama and foreign policy ignorance

Sometimes if I don't know the answer to something, I will hopethsize what I think the answer is and explain why. Unfortunately I don't always tell the person that I'm talking to that this is just a hypothesis and is not something I know for fact.

My wife has gotten very good at reading me and figuring out when I really know something and when I'm just pulling it of... somewhere.

I've also gotten better at acknowledging that I don't really know, but this is my best guess...

Obama is doing the same thing, but with US foreign policy. Not a good move. Especially when you are advocating something as critical as withdrawing 120K troops from a volitile region, it's always best to know your real reasoning and not just make stuff up off the cuff. I think Obama's real problem is that his babysitters haven't figured out a way to put a teleprompter on his shirt sleeve so that he never has to fly solo.

Empty Suit Obama is showing himself to be Empty Head Obama. This doesn't speak well of a Harvard education.

Hmmm... Mike, you're killing me!

No, not my brother Mike. Mike Huckabee. Sometimes the hardest thing for a politician to do is to keep their mouth shut, or their computer silent. The Huckabee surge could be followed by the Huckabee kaboom if he keeps being symptomatic of foot in mouth. First their was the whole Mormon statement during the NYT interview. I mean come on. The answer to all of the questions about differences in religion between himself and Romney is simply, "It has nothing to do with this race. I am a Christian man of morals and strong convictions that have shaped my character. I do not know what exactly Mr Romney believes, but that is between him and God." That's it. The end. Any more questions on it should be flatly refused. Stick to the issues. Stick to principles. This is not about a debate between Mormonism and Christianity.

Now it comes round to foreign affairs. Evidently not Mike's strong suit. I can tell you that "the base" of the party are the ones that vote in a primary. The base does not want to hear that we have been too rough with people like Iran. The base wants to hear that we are going to stop mad men in their tracks and we will do it alone if we have to. BTW this is one of the ONLY issues that we really LIKE GWB on, so don't harp on him for it. In this regard GWB should be honored and held up. If you want to get on him, pick something easy, like border enforcement (also popular with the base), pick fat government, pick entitlements, pick pork barrel spending, pick stupid moves like Harriet Myers, but then follow up with good things like John Roberts. Come ON PEOPLE!!!

I need to go look at Fred's site again. I hear he has some detailed policy issues up on his site and I like the smack down at the worthless Iowa debate.

Good piece in NRO on this.