by Boaz Bismuth
U.S. President Barack Obama isn't a pacifist, and he isn't bluffing. But have his Middle East initiatives contributed to the region's devolution, or will he - as he hopes - be remembered well for what he avoided doing?
American journalist Jeffrey Goldberg, who is
close to President Barack Obama, didn't really surprise anyone when he
presented "The Obama Doctrine" in The Atlantic magazine's April edition.
Following a lengthy analysis, Goldberg concluded that "George W. Bush
was also a gambler, not a bluffer. He will be remembered harshly for the
things he did in the Middle East. Barack Obama is gambling that he will
be judged well for the things he didn't do." But will he?
Barack Obama has no faith in the Middle East.
Even if he did, he is convinced that like every other American
president, he can't do much. He believes that to fix our region, it is
necessary to launch a war that would weaken America, and therefore such a
war should be avoided. He's also not in any rush to go up against the
Muslim world. That explains why, from the start, he never intended to
take action in Syria, despite the lines he drew in the sand back in
2012. Bush wasn't bluffing, Goldberg argues, but what about Obama?
Jeffrey Goldberg's article relates how he
mentioned to Obama a scene from "The Godfather III" in which Michael
Corleone explains why he couldn't escape the clutches of organized
crime: "I told Obama that the Middle East is to his presidency what the
mob is to Corleone, and I started to quote the Al Pacino line: 'Just
when I thought I was out...'
"'It pulls you back in,' Obama said, completing the thought."
That's the story. Obama wanted to flee the
Middle East. But the Middle East, when it is ignored or addressed
incorrectly, comes knocking. If not at the door, then on someone's
legacy.
We remember how Obama incorrectly assessed the
threat posed by the Islamic State group. He also, by his own admission,
didn't understand U.S. citizens' fear of the Islamist organization
following the terrorist attacks in Paris and San Bernardino last year.
But the Islamic State phenomenon forced Obama to come to terms with the
fact that the ills of the Middle East could not be fixed on his watch,
or even for a few generations to come.
One might conclude from this that Obama's
initiatives in the Middle East were strictly for protocol. But the way
he sees it, intervention in Syria would have cost American lives without
guaranteeing results. On the other hand, diplomatic intervention in the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict does nothing to weaken America, even if it
also does nothing for Israel or the Palestinians.
Obama is not a pacifist. He doesn't want to
isolate America, but he also doesn't want America to be suicidal. His
policies, however, have undermined America's stature as a superpower.
Fortunately, America's strength, which has been built up over many
generations, is such that one president, even after two terms, cannot
wreck the glorious inheritance bestowed upon him by his predecessors.
August 30, 2013 may go down in history as the
date on which Obama kept the U.S. from entering into a destructive
Muslim civil war and also as the date on which he removed the threat of
chemical weapons Turkey and Iran posed to Israel. Alternately, it might
be remembered as the day Obama allowed the Middle East to fall into the
hands of Russia, Iran, and the Islamic State group.
Obama doesn't believe in Churchillian speeches. He thinks they lead to war. Others would say they actually led to peace.
Boaz Bismuth
Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=32361
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment