Obama’s Diplomatic Offensive
By: Craig Chamberlain
President Obama is confident in his diplomatic abilities. He’d better be, because by the time he’s done with the budget cuts to our military we won’t be able to fight a mob carrying torches or pitchforks, let alone rogue nations, pirates or terrorists. He, like most doves, believes that there isn’t a problem in the world that can’t be solved by sitting down and talking things over. Diplomacy is fine, if two nations are negotiating over something small, or if the two countries are both democratic, and unlikely to go to war with one another.
For example, there would be no problem if Obama wanted to negotiate a trade treaty with say, India. Both countries are democratic, and therefore were not likely to end up at war with each other, and trade is something that can be negotiated with too much danger of war breaking out. Dictatorships, on the other hand, don’t play by the same rules. They don’t answer to their people so they aren’t nearly as reluctant to start a fight. And since they don’t have to listen to their people they don’t feel too obliged to honor any agreements they make.
That’s not going to stop President Obama from trying. He really doesn’t have any other choice, he campaigned as the anti- Bush, so he really can’t go around using military force without alienating his base, and he really believes his own propaganda. He truly thinks that he can heal the world. That the rest of the world will be unable to resist his charms. That all it will take is a bow or a handshake and he will have converted an enemy into a friend.
In the real world it doesn’t work that way. Try making friends with a bully and he only ends up bullying you more. Dictators are bullies, it’s what they do. And if they sense weakness it’s only going to make them more aggressive. There is a name for Obama’s foreign policy, it’s called appeasement. It’s been tried before. Neville Chamberlain went to Munich in 1938, and sold out Czechoslovakia to Nazi aggression. Chamberlain went back to London confident that he had “secured peace in our time” World War Two broke out one year later. British and French appeasement only made Hitler more sure of himself, and hungrier for war and conquest.
Groveling to Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, and all the other tyrannies, doesn’t do the United States of America any good. It only makes already hostile, aggressive countries more hostile and aggressive. What does it say about us that we are all too willing to abandon the people of these countries to dictatorial rule, if it will make the dictators look favorably on President Obama? And why shouldn’t they be more favorable towards him? He’s done nothing to challenge them. He’s made no stand for human rights in these countries. Never mind the millions of people in these countries who risk their lives fighting for democracy and liberty.
It’s not as if we can claim ignorance of these regimes. The Castro’s have been in power for fifty years, we know what they are. The Mullahs have been in power for thirty years, we know what they are. Hugo Chavez has been in power for ten years, we know what kind of a leader he is. Daniel Ortega spent ten years as dictator of Nicaragua brutalizing and terrorizing the people of that country, they didn’t recover until he was ousted from power until his friend Hugo helped him by the presidency back. They are all tyrants erasing any civil liberties or political rights that once existed in their countries. And these are the types of leaders President Obama’s is worried about impressing? Well, it shouldn’t surprise anyone that a radical from the school of Saul Alinsky is running around trying to make friends with other radicals.
But it’s a dangerous game. So far none of these leaders have responded with anything but contempt. The Iranians made it very clear that they would only talk with us(as if we haven’t been talking to these butchers for 30 years) if we surrendered the Middle East to their hegemony and allowed them all the nuclear weapons they want. The Castro’s don’t seem too interested. After all, if the establish ties with the United States it gets rid of their scapegoat. Who will they blame all of Cuba’s problems on if we lift the embargo and establish diplomatic ties? They certainly aren’t going to blame the corrupt, brutal, and incompetent socialistic system they’ve used for the last fifty years. Dictators need someone to serve as a scapegoat. If they can’t blame a foreign power or a zionist conspiracy the people might start thinking about blaming their own government.
It doesn’t serve the interests of this country to waste our time on a diplomatic offensive that isn’t going to go anywhere. Instead of cuddling up to every dictator that he meets he would better serve the interests of the United States, and the people languishing under dictators, by opposing them instead of collaborating with them.