Obama’s Inability to Multi-task With the Rest of Us Taking Country Down

Posted on September 16, 2011

During the battle for health care reform, the President dropped just about everything else and concentrated on getting this legislation passed. He even went out into the nation to talk up the program.  But little else got very much attention.  His seconds were working on more legislative matters to push through Congress but that is not leadership and attention not paid to their efforts has a effect.

While he was dithering on a request for more troops in Afghanistan from the command in the field, many more young Americans died needlessly.

Now it seems that the increasing tensions between Israel and Turkey and Israel and Cairo are not subject to presidential public statements.  There are reported to have been back channel direct talks with Iran over the general direction of the Arab Spring and other matters of concern.

And what of other areas of the globe where a comment from the President would help?  They are few and far between.  Jobs are important but we need to keep up our contacts globally to try to get more  orders for our industry and our farms.  It is part of job creation.

It must be that the President has problems with multitasking and that is a given high priority requirement for the job in his office.  Here is a pertinent summary of  an article in Foreign Affairs that addresses the requirements for President in foreign affairs in terms of talent and attention:

By stressing unilateralism over cooperation, preemption over prevention, and firepower over staying power, the Bush administration has alienated the United States’ natural allies and disengaged from many of the world’s most pressing problems. To restore U.S. global standing–which is essential in checking the spread of lethal weapons and winning the war on terrorism–the next Democratic president[ in 2004] must recognize the obvious: that means are as important as ends.

Talk about “the past is prologue.”

Finally and worst of all, an article in Britain’s Telegraph last February had this blaring and glaring headline:

Do tyrants fear America anymore? President Obama’s timid foreign policy is an embarrassment for a global superpower

By World Last updated: February 28th, 2011

Muammar Gaddafi with Barack Obama in 2009 (Photo: AFP/Getty)Muammar Gaddafi with Barack Obama in 2009 (Photo: AFP/Getty)

The débacle of Washington’s handling of the Libya issue is symbolic of a wider problem at the heart of the Obama administration’s foreign policy. The fact that it took ten days and at least a thousand dead on the streets of Libya’s cities before President Obama finally mustered the courage to call for Muammar “mad dog” Gaddafi to step down is highly embarrassing for the world’s only superpower, and emblematic of a deer-in-the-headlights approach to world leadership. Washington seems incapable of decisive decision-making on foreign policy at the moment, a far cry from the days when it swept entire regimes from power, and defeated America’s enemies with deep-seated conviction and an unshakeable drive for victory.

Just a few years ago the United States was genuinely feared on the world stage, and dictatorial regimes, strategic adversaries and state sponsors of terror trod carefully in the face of the world’s most powerful nation. Now Washington appears weak, rudderless and frequently confused in its approach. From Tehran to Tripoli, the Obama administration has been pathetically slow to lead, and afraid to condemn acts of state-sponsored repression and violence. When protesters took to the streets to demonstrate against the Islamist dictatorship in Iran in 2009, the brutal repression that greeted them was hardly a blip on Barack Obama’s teleprompter screen, barely meriting a response from a largely silent presidency.

In contrast to Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, President Obama fails to see the United States as an exceptional nation, with a unique role in leading the free world and standing up to tyranny. In his speeches abroad he has frequently found fault with his own country, rather than projecting confidence in American greatness. From Cairo to Strasbourg he has adopted an apologetic tone rather than demonstrating faith in America as a shining city upon a hill, a beacon of freedom and liberty. A leader who lacks pride in his own nation’s historic role as a great liberator simply cannot project strength abroad.

It has also become abundantly clear that the Obama team attaches little importance to human rights issues, and in contrast to the previous administration has not pursued a freedom agenda in the Middle East and elsewhere. It places far greater value upon engagement with hostile regimes, even if they are carrying out gross human rights abuses, in the mistaken belief that appeasement enhances security. This has been the case with Iran, Russia and North Korea for example. This administration has also been all too willing to sacrifice US leadership in deference to supranational institutions such as the United Nations, whose track record in standing up to dictatorships has been virtually non-existent.

The White House’s painful navel-gazing on Libya last week, with even the French adopting a far tougher stance, is cause for grave concern. The Obama administration’s timid approach to foreign policy is the last thing the world needs at a time of mounting turmoil in the Middle East, including the growing threat of a nuclear-armed Iran, and Islamist militancy on the rise from Egypt to Yemen. US leadership is now needed more than ever, but has embarrassingly gone AWOL on the world stage.

Posted in: Uncategorized