Obama's Grand Strategy

[davidbfpo]

Professor Scott Walker, an American and long time UK resident, has a scathing review of President Obama's recent interview: https://theconversation.com/obama-blithely-sells-out-his-allies-and-millions-of-syrians-in-legacy-interview-56224?

[AmericanPride]

Interesting arguments that Obama is somehow an isolationist in any sense. It's better defined as 'selective engagement'.

[Bill Moore]

Interesting arguments that Obama is somehow an isolationist in any sense. It's better defined as 'selective engagement'.

Agreed, and I disagree with Outlaw's assertion that Wilson was an isolationist. The country at that time was in an isolationist mood, but Wilson was engaged globally (selectively). He sent two military expeditions to Mexico, managed to gain support to enter WWI, shaped the post WWI world order (arguably ineffectively, but he was engaged), and pushed for China's independence. Neither Obama nor Wilson were isolationists.

[Bill Moore]

Professor Scott Walker, an American and long time UK resident, has a scathing review of President Obama's recent interview: https://theconversation.com/obama-blithely-sells-out-his-allies-and-millions-of-syrians-in-legacy-interview-56224?

Some of this seems a little over the top, but of course he has a narrative and going over the top makes it resonate more.

Rather than evaluate what could be done to mitigate the damage, Obama has chided allies such as Britain, Germany, and France. He has implicitly lashed out at his former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, as she campaigns to succeed him. And he has shown little regard for the hundreds of thousands of Syrians who have been killed and the millions who have been displaced, and who will continue to die and flee in his final months in office.

Chided? Britain allegedly ran out of munitions during the Libya operation. If true, chiding may be called for, since there are certain expectations that everyone in a collective security organization like NATO pulls their weight. Of course we know that isn't the case and hasn't been the case for decades now. Obama wasn't the only President to call them out, and Dick Cheney referred to the original members as "old Europe," and it wasn't intended as a compliment. Several former U.S. SECDEFs called NATO members out for not investing the bare minimum of their GDP into defense as agreed upon. The term freeloaders may be a loaded term, but it isn't entirely without merit. The interview also suggested a close relationship between Merkel and Obama, so not sure where the chiding is there. As for France, they have been increasingly supportive when it comes to pursuing mutual interests in a number of areas. Obama ignored the advice from two of his Secretaries of State, Bush ignored Secretary of State Powell, and I'm sure if we go back in history we'll find plenty of examples. At the end of the day the President if responsible for making the decision. He or she must compare the pro's and con's not only as it relates to diplomacy, but our security, our economic interests, and the will/appetite of the American people, all that and more influence a decision. I think most agree his call on Syria, while understandable, was a bad call, but he owned up to it (surprisingly). Oddly, he sees that decision as a positive.

[Bill Moore]

Outlaw,

Really?

3. disconnect the US completely from ME and Europe

Reference point 3.....Obama has actually allowed Russia to fully achievement this point all on his own...especially with the release of his Obama doctrine interview one can "see" exactly how Obama himself supports this.....

These achievements are not as some have stated here..."melodramatic".....it is the ground reality staring us literally in the face and daily now...

I made the statement and I'll make it again, this is melodramatic. We're not "completely" out of the Middle East or Europe, nor is there any indication that will happen despite Russia's alleged desires to push us out. Though it does seem that Russia downsized in the ME almost overnight. We have more forces in Europe than we did when Bush left office. This doesn't even address our diplomatic and economic engagement. We're still heavily engaged in the ME, and will be for some time to come. There is also a depend signal from both regions for us to be engaged more than we are. We're still a great power, but we have enough crises (slow burn and immediate) to deal with it without creating the myth that we have somehow been pushed out of either of those regions.