But I want to talk about the recent decision to place missiles in Romania. A former communist country in Eastern Europe, I would think Russia would consider it, rightly or wrongly, as part of its sphere of influence.
Last year, the Obama administration opted to not place missiles in the Czech Republic and Poland (after Robert Gates said it was lie they weren't going to) drawing criticism from those countries. It was thought the decision was made to keep Russia happy in the context of dealing with Iran.
Hey, it was a calculation.
However, this logic is put into question now given Obama has decided to go ahead and place missile interceptors in Romania.This drew vociferous ire from the Russians.
Let me see if I get this straight. The Bush policy of missile defense was laughed and scoffed at by the left and the incoming administration. It was seen as another mark of insensitivity under the Bush "reign of terror." n an effort to distance himself from Bush, Obama scrapped the deal. Now, just one year later he's "revamping" the strategy?
Therein lies the problem with Obama and the Democrats. They assumed everything Bush did was wrong and was the crux of all America's problems. They figured do the opposite and all will work out. Instead, the opposite has happened. Obama and the Democrats have essentially followed lock-step with Bush's policies and this recent move only adds to it. You even have Biden going on Larry King saying "Iraq can be an achievement for this administration!" A war they chastised and were against. Now they want to take credit?
Which begs the question: How accurate was Bush with his assessments on foreign policy?
So. He ended ruffling Russian feathers after all and now he has two committed allies in the Czech Republic and Poland sore with the United States.
I think it's time Obama stops looking at things through the prism of Bush. Time for him to grow up and start making foreign policy an important part of his presidency. If this keeps up, he'll ironically end up upsetting even allies.
***
Speaking of Russia. I still don't get how it was admitted into the G7. Its resource (oil mostly) driven economy is in tatters. It's nowhere near the levels of the members of the G7. Obviously, that was a political move to assuage its paranoid tendencies. Spain, China or India have a better claim to enter the G7. ***
This brings me to another question. Accepting that Russia is weak economically (and demographically), would it be in its best interest to ever risk war with the United States? If they were to ever engage in direct war, in the long run, the United States would prevail given its obvious advantages.
What I'm saying is the best Russia can do is voice displeasure with the Americans. But beyond that, being a rational player in global affairs, what can it do despite its military power?
No. I'm not suggesting the U.S. dictate policy along these lines. Far from it. It should be engaging the Russians and avoiding upsetting them. I'm just openly considering the reality of Russia's own weaknesses.
I was pleased and welcomed Obama's decision to cancel the so called missile shield installation earlier this year. This latest foreign policy guffaw is just bizarre.
ReplyDeleteBlame Bush? Very well, but Obama seems no better or foreign policy. I wonder if the recent events in Ukraine have made Obama decide to play a weak hand in Central and Eastern Europe?
I do respectfully disagree with the belief that Russia is in no position to do much about the policies of the U.S. We are not talking about war between the two powers, but economic and trade relations between Russia and the West are important, not only in the petroleum markets, but steel, agriculture, and IT/Engineering.
ReplyDeletebtw. added you to my blogroll this eve. Thanks for producing an interesting blog.
Yes, he's hard to read. It easier to read Bush.
ReplyDeleteObama is weak on foreign policy.
I'm not sure what precipitated this latest move. I thought his angle was to not ruffle Russia and use them as leverage against Iran.
I didn't mean to downplay Russia's leverage, and I'm guilty of focusing on its overall weak economic structure that can in a long-war impede them. But you're absolutely right about the areas you mentioned.
Russia should be seen as a partner.
Thanks for the link. Meant to do it when I posted about yours but..I procrastinated. Thanks for the kind words. I do my best.
ReplyDeleteObama is tough to follow. He seems to try to please too many opposite points of view at the same time and he wants to go too fast. Speed kills and he should know that.
ReplyDeletePaul, I'm not sure that's it. I don't know where this he's a "pragmatist" comes from. It's a tag put on him but I don't really see it. When he says "I'm open" he's really saying "as long as it's by my rules."
ReplyDeleteLet's call a spade a spade: If Bush would have conducted FP this way, he would have been cajoled and chastised off the map.
Ever hear of the term 'pleases everyone and no one?'
I just think his inexperience and disinterest in FP is showing. It's possible he thought he could just be himself and everything would flow from there. Now he's finding out he over rated himself.
Come up with a game plan and stick with it.
Just my perception of course.