Recent turmoil in the Middle East has raised larger concern over President Obama’s foreign policy ability. Is Obama an effective statesman?
Based on his broken promises, botched diplomacy and his seeming ambivalence with regards to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, he’s mediocre.
This is the president that falsely promised to wind down the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan in a responsible way. He delivered on that promise by pulling the troops out of Iraq and ending the war in that country.
That being said, the President, has occasionally surged the troop count in Afghanistan while continuing the fight that still rages today.
On the other half of his promise, the President has failed.
The only shining moment of his foreign policy was when he announced to the world that Osama Bin Laden had been killed. Other than that, though, the president has failed to produce many successes in the Middle East.
The events in Libya in 2011 posed a great foreign policy challenge to the President.
In March 2011, through the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), he began giving military aid to the rebels fighting against the late Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi.
Because he offered military aid, some claimed he was pushing the United States into another war. Even worse is that he was contributing military aid while only leading from the shadows and giving most of the control to European nations such as France. This idea of “Leading from behind” does not fit into American values and America’s role in the world.
More recent challenges to President Obama’s foreign policy come mainly from the Middle East’s galvanizing political movement, the Arab spring. Revolts in Egypt and Libya, as well as the ever-looming Iran and Syria, pose the greatest threat to how people will view the president’s foreign policy ability.
In response to an offensive video, anti-American revolts throughout the Middle East came into being. These revolts included the attacking of American embassies in these countries and the murder of several, including an ambassador. Was the Obama administration complicit in this security breach? No, but more could have been pre-emptively done to support the security of our diplomatic mission abroad.
Syria and Iran seem to always be in the background of foreign policy struggles. The dictator of Syria, Bashar al-Assad, has massacred the rebels in the country fighting against him.
Iran has pledged to aid the Syrian dictator, and on top of that, there is the constant threat of Iran obtaining nuclear weapons which would pose a dangerous foreign policy problem.
There are many options that can be taken to deal with these threats, but the one action that cannot happen is inaction. This is exactly what President Obama has decided to do.
He has allowed the leaders of these nations to run amuck and harass the US and its allies. The view of the US has diminished in the Middle East from the influence of these leaders and consequently from the inaction of the president.
There needs to be some form of pressure put on these hostile nations to know that they cannot just push US and United Nation policy to the side. Based on the President’s record, one might suggest some sort of military presence as he did in Libya.
It is unclear what President Obama will officially decide to do about both Syria and Iran. Only time will be able to tell.
But as the election approaches, and as claims start to fly back and forth between both sides of the isle, remember this one simple fact. Obama is a mediocre statesman with a handful of victories and many geopolitical challenges ahead of him.
