By Andrew Cline on 6.9.09 @ 6:09AM
All he is saying, is give peace a chance.
Liberalism's fatal flaw is that it misapprehends human nature. It
does this in nearly every conceivable way, but its most basic
fallacy is the notion that conflict is not natural, peace is.
Conflict, therefore, will be eliminated if the ignorance,
injustice or avarice from which it grew is eliminated.
This utopian fantasy is the underlying principle of President
Obama's foreign policy. Hence, he tours the planet apologizing
for America's (perceived) sins. This amazing spectacle cannot be
chalked up to one man's desire to be liked (though that surely
plays a role). The president's humility on the world stage is not
therapy for Obama; it is therapy for our enemies and rivals. It
is Freudian foreign policy. Remove their fears, and their
hostility will disappear.
When Obama goes to Europe or the Middle East and agrees with
those who say America has too often behaved as an arrogant bully,
he is trying to change the way our enemies and rivals perceive
us. When he orders the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed and bans
harsh interrogation techniques before his administration's review
of them is complete, he is trying to change the way our enemies
and rivals perceive us. But to what end?
Obama believes that the United States has enemies and rivals
because of the way the United States has behaved in the past.
It's why he has spent so much time distancing himself from not
only the policies of George W. Bush but those of LBJ, JFK, Teddy
Roosevelt and James Monroe, too. Whatever America might have done
to you in the past, he is trying to tell the world, you can't
hold it against me. I'm going to be different. I'm going to
listen to you. I'm not going to impose my will upon you. I want
to be your friend, not your master.
This thinking reflects another liberal misunderstanding -- that
intentions matter more than, or at least as much as, effects.
Thus, as
Robert Kagan and others have pointed out, Obama believes he
can make foreigners like the United States by speaking softly and
humbly while he continues, virtually unchanged, the same policies
as his predecessor.
If the foreigners Obama hopes to win over have not yet seen the
inherent contradiction between his words and deeds (and some
have), they soon will. Were the president to take his thinking to
its logical conclusion, he would actually end all U.S. policies
that anger foreigners. He would withdraw all of our troops from
the Middle East, dismantle the CIA, toss Israel to the wolves,
and pull our fleets back to within our territorial waters (sort
of a Ron Paul approach).
But Obama is sharp enough to understand how harmful this would be
to our national interests. So he settles for continuing policies
that anger our enemies, he just does so with a smile. He seems to
believe that dialogue -- explaining our non-hostile motives --
will end or significantly reduce anti-American feelings. They
won't hate us if only they understand us. (Never mind that George
W. Bush tried this same approach with the Muslim world.)
But if Muslims really hate us because we support Israel, then
words and half-measures will accomplish nothing. Until we abandon
Israel, the hatred will fester. If Muslims really hate us because
we have troops in Saudi Arabia, then nothing short of withdrawing
our troops will change their feelings. Obama is betting that the
world doesn't hate us because of our policies, but solely because
of our attitude. So he's changing the attitude while keeping most
of the policies.
Obama's belief in dialogue, in the winning power of friendly
humility, will be tested not by the reaction to his speeches, but
by the success or failure of his smiling overtures to those now
hostile to our country. The results so far: Osama bin Laden has
denounced him, Kim Jong-Il has mocked him by launching rockets
and rattling his centrifuge, Mahmoud Ahmadinijad has defied him,
and European leaders have refused his requests for more NATO
troops and centrally planned economic stimulus programs.
The early evidence suggests that Obama's attempt to win friends
and influence heads of state with conciliatory speeches has not
been fruitful. But we're just getting started. He hasn't had a
chance to really sit down with Palestinians and Israelis and
negotiate a peace, or sit down with Ahmadinejad and show him that
acquiring a nuclear weapon is not in the best interest of world
peace and security.
To believe that these and other such initiatives will succeed,
one has to believe that other nations and peoples are motivated
primarily by a desire to get along with others, and not a desire
to acquire more power, land, prestige, or influence. One has to
believe that the desire for power and status stems not from human
nature, but from outside factors -- such as a misplaced fear of
American intentions, or a misunderstanding of a rival's point of
view. Fix the outside causes of their hostility, and people will
revert to their natural, peaceful state.
President Obama's approach to foreign policy rests entirely on
that premise. If he is right, amazing accomplishments await. If
he is wrong, reality awaits instead.
topics:
Foreign Policy, Iran, European Union, Middle East
