With such a wide area, it is actually difficult to choose where to begin. It has become obvious even to some die hard supporters of President Obama that he appears to be totally out of his depth when it comes to foreign affairs. Then again, with the healthcare disasters coming fast and furious, he does appear to be out of his depth in all too many ways. There is the Benghazi disaster where President Obama promised that no effort would be spared in bringing the perpetrators to justice. If perpetrators being brought to justice meant their being interviewed by United States news agencies, then mission accomplished, but if the President meant to pay for their crimes, well, then not so much. The main blowback from this particular disaster is not likely to break the surface until the 2016 Presidential election and then only should Hillary, “What Difference At This Point Does It Make?!”, Clinton is the Democrat candidate. It could very easily be that the single casualty of the murder of four Americans, including the Ambassador and two former Navy Seals who attempted a rescue and did get some people to safety, will be the Clinton campaign with the sole question being whether she will be sunk by her own words by a Democrat in the primaries or a Republican in the general election. Time will tell.
As far as the other major disasters currently in progress, one would be hard pressed to pick the most dangerous between the Russia invasion of the Crimea Peninsula of the Ukraine, the lack of resolve in preventing Iran from attaining nuclear weapons, or the blind drive to force a Middle East peace no matter the dangers and damages which may be caused in the process. The basic difficulty that President Obama and his administration have in each of these diplomatically explosive situations has been their inability to pose any credible threat to those who take up an adversarial role against the United States presumed interests. In the Middle East peace process while President Obama and Secretary of State both pressure Israel mercilessly despite the Israeli government and Defense Forces both working with the many facets of the multitude of advisors and bureaucrats from both the United States Department of Defense and State Department to find some accommodation which satisfies both parties while Palestinian Authority leaders from Mahmoud Abbas on down take turns declaring their contempt and refusal to agree to even the most basic principles and measures of the proposed framework. Despite the refusal by the Palestinians, President Obama has declared that Mahmoud Abbas is prepared to recognize Israel as the State for the Jewish People, a point which Abbas has been most adamant over his refusal to agree now or forever into the future. His outright refusal to so recognize Israel has been defined as more than the normal red line but as something that in so antithetical to the Palestinians and the Arab world that just breaching the subject is considered an insult worthy of causing the Palestinians to walk from the peace process in response. Furthermore, State Department Spokeswoman Jen Psaki stated to the Palestinian Al-Quds newspaper Saturday, “The American position is clear, Israel is a Jewish state. However, we do not see a need that both sides recognize this position as part of the final agreement.” Such a misinterpretation from President Obama of the Palestinian position, also as this has been one of the Palestinian refusals repeated the most since it was introduced to the discussion, is proof that the President does not consider foreign policy situations to be an area he should need to address.
The same can be said of the so-called great compromise with Iran over their nuclear program which the President has touted as a great step forward in preventing the Iranians from producing a nuclear weapon, an evaluation not shared by the leadership in Israel and one that caused the French sufficient distress that they initially refused to accept and actually vetoed the plan while the British warned Saudi Arabia’s Royals through a side channel of the dangerous lack of teeth of the plan touted by the United States. After consultations between the United States with the British and French, the plan was forced through a little over a week later. The final framework with Iran was very close to a complete surrender to the Iranian’s main set of demands which they had held strong and insisted from the beginning while President Obama and the American negotiators slowly but ever so surely compromised away one difference after another until the only demands made upon the Iranians were mostly cosmetic and promises while the allies relaxed or ended numerous sanctions and released billions, if not trillions, of dollars to the Iranians. Finally, Russian President Putin has all but completely ignored and disregarded every protestation coming from President Obama assured that there will be absolutely no price to pay. President Putin had observed President Obama’s inaction and fecklessness after the murder of the American Ambassador and three others in Benghazi followed by President Obama’s backtracking from his Red-Line on chemical weapons use by Syrian Dictator Bashar al-Assad. President Obama could not have given a better show of spineless weakness in a crisis. The Syrian fiasco was the final proof Putin required to realize that he could do absolutely anything without fear of an American response of any consequence. He realized that no matter what threat or pressure President Obama threatened, there would be little if any consequence so Putin ordered Russian shock troops into the Crimean Peninsula and took command of the naval base at Sevastopol on the Black Sea. The last example is almost not worth mention as when the Chinese claimed an extended naval maritime zone to include nearly all of the South China Sea which also placed two Japanese claimed Islands within the newly extended zone. There was almost no visible challenge from the United States as American passenger aircraft and ships were instructed to respect the Chinese claims. The sailing of a small American naval contingency through the zone and not taking up a standing position was completely ignored by the Chinese. This caused great consternation with the Japanese who had agreements to defend their claims with the United States and were left high and dry just as have the Ukrainians who also had border guarantees from the United States.
There are many theories and explanations as to why President Obama and his administration have such a poor record in the field of foreign affairs. Many claim it has to do with his lack of knowledge about foreign affairs as his entire record have been as a community organizer and a State Senator who voted “Present” more often than any other member of that body. Some claim that his temperament is unsuited for handling tense and terse adversarial relations and dealings which are often at the core of foreign relations. The majority of explanations which all revolve around President Obama having a disdain, dislike, aversion or inability to actually understand and take the necessary stands and forceful actions necessary in foreign affairs, especially in any adversarial situation. Unfortunately, it is my opinion that all of these excuses and reasoning are wrong and such is proven by President Obama’s and his administration’s standing up and being forceful when it comes to pressuring and taking adversarial positions when it comes to Israel and his ability to pressure and persuade the French and British to back from their misgivings and agree to the weak and dangerous framework agreement with Iran. When it comes to forcing nations who have been historically allies and friends of the United States, President Obama can strike with the effect of a wrecking ball completely blasting through any resistance with total disregard. It is only when the required actions would be in opposing historical adversaries of the United States that President Obama and his Administration become incompetent and impotent. I firmly believe that the apparent incompetence and ineffectualness in foreign affairs has been an intentional enacted policy and not due to any lack of effort. The best and most fitting explanation is that the foreign policy of President Obama and administration has simply been just another extension of his plan to fundamentally change the United States. President Obama has stated in his campaign for his first term that he was going to take a new and different path that would make the United States take a different position in the world, one that would be less forceful and more accommodating and that was supposed to make the world love the United States. I do not believe that his actual goal was a lovable United States; his desire was an impotent and ineffectual United States which would surrender her status as the world’s super power. This change in the world standing for the United States required two major changes. The first change was to make the United States have a smaller impact and to aim for minimizing the American footprint on the world. This has been accomplished by compromising and facilitating traditional enemies while countering of leaving traditional allies and friends to fend for themselves or even actively opposing their efforts whenever possible. The second change was the neutering of American military might. That has been started by cancelling the production of the remainder of F-22 Raptors along with the cancellation of numerous other military weapons, many of which were well into the final planning stages and where billions of dollars had been invested in the work to date. All of those funds became wasted resources, but that did not matter as long as it weakened the United States military capabilities. Then there was the negotiation of a new START weapons reduction treaty which resulted the United States not only reducing its nuclear arsenal by a more significant percentage than was required of the Russians, but also had excessively weak enforcement and verification language which may have allowed the Russians not to meet their entirety of obligation. Finally, in every budget the military has been cut excessively with even another huge cut coming this past year even after the sequester was taken fifty-percent from the defense budget. The United States military budget has been reduced to under five percent of the total budget in the proposed budget from the White House for the next fiscal year. These cuts have pared the military of the United States down to levels not seen since before World War II. Such an anti-military budgeting has also made the world less safe as the United States now has not only retreated from her role as the enforcer of freedom but had her claws and teeth pulled to such an extent that she may no longer be able to fulfill that role for many years to come. The damage done in the foreign policy arena by President Obama has been of such a magnitude that he truly has proven to be another President Jimmy Carter except on steroids. The lasting question is will the United States of America ever return from this disaster sitting in the White House.