|
by Roberto Diego
Many people believe that the foreign policy views of Barack Obama represent an entirely new approach to foreign policy. He says that his view is a new approach that seeks to discard the past policies that have not worked. His willingness to talk unconditionally with Iranian leaders is considered a bold new idea that will enable real change in the Middle East.
Let’s forget that what he says about past policies is not true, our policy has not been one of cowboy diplomacy or “going it alone.” In fact, we have tried to talk to the Iranians many times over the last 30 years and it has gotten us and several European countries nowhere. Let’s also forget that the real reason for our not being able to negotiate with Iran is the government of Iran, not our foreign policy. Any attempt we have made to negotiate with Iran is seen by them as proof of our weakness.
I would like to create a hypothetical discussion between Obama and the Iranian Mullahs to see if Obama has put his finger on a new policy that might work. Let’s consider what the Mullahs might say to Obama and what he might say in return.
Let’s put the following words into the mouths of the Mullahs:
"The U.S. is an imperialist country that has tried to dominate the Middle East and steal our oil. You went into Iraq using lies and propaganda. Iraq was a wrong war and you should immediately withdraw from the country. You have nuclear weapons and yet you complain that we want to be able to defend ourselves against you. What makes you better than other countries? You have to understand our position when we see you invade other countries like you did in Iraq and Afghanistan. You cannot tell us what to do. You cannot defeat us militarily. You defend Israel who has murdered Palestinians, is occupying their country and has stolen their land. Why do you blame us for hating you and wanting your destruction? You are no different than George Bush"
How would Obama respond to this?
To understand what that answer might be, I’ve culled the Internet for some quotes from some of Obama’s speeches:
“When we send our young men and women into harm’s way, we have a solemn obligation not to fudge the numbers or shade the truth about why they’re going…[We should] never, ever go to war without enough troops to win the war, secure the peace, and earn the respect of the world.”[1]
“The days of using the war on terror as a political football are over. [...] It is time to give Iraqis their country back, and it is time to refocus America’s efforts on the wider struggle yet to be won.” In his speech Obama also called for a phased withdrawal of American troops starting in 2007, and an opening of diplomatic dialogue with Iraq’s neighbors, Syria and Iran.”[2]
“I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.”[3]
[If Iran] "tried to pose a serious threat to us they wouldn't . . . they wouldn't stand a chance."[4]
“I didn't see the weapons of mass destruction at the time, I didn't think there was an imminent threat from Saddam Hussein.”[5]
“We can rattle our sabers all we want but, realistically, we don't have troops for an invasion [Iran] and surgical strikes aren't going to work.[6]
"America must lead a global effort to secure all nuclear weapons and material at vulnerable sites within four years...We must also work with Russia to update and scale back our dangerously outdated Cold War nuclear postures and de-emphasize the role of nuclear weapons. America must not rush to produce a new generation of nuclear warheads. And we should take advantage of recent technological advances to build bipartisan consensus behind ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty... I will work to negotiate a verifiable global ban on the production of new nuclear weapons material."[7]
“I will not take the military option off the table.”[8]
“The Bush Administration’s failure to be consistently involved in helping Israel achieve peace with the Palestinians has been both wrong for our friendship with Israel, as well as badly damaging to our standing in the Arab world.”[9]
What would Obama’s response to Iran be? Given his public statements he could only say that the Iranians are right and the U.S. should get out of the Middle East immediately. At this point, because of his own statements, he has no military option because, as they have done with every other President before Obama, they will not negotiate on nuclear power.
If Obama now goes to the American people to make a case for the military option, which he will never do, by the way, he would have only one argument. They won’t negotiate. His only option will be “cowboy diplomacy.”
[1] http://www.positive-motivational-quotes.com/barack-obama-quotes/
[2] Ibid
[3] Ibid
[4] http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/05/is_iran_a_threat_or_not_senato.html
[5] http://www.quotesandpoem.com/quotes/listquotes/author/barack-obama
[6] Ibid
[7] http://www.peaceactionwest.org/issues/usnuclearweapons/us_nuclear_weapons:_the_next_president_on_nuclear_weapons/
[8] http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/jul2007/obam-j28.shtml
[9] http://www.innocentenglish.com/politics/barack-obama-quotes-sayings-best-speeches.html
To make a comment send me an e-mail
New Century Publishing Catalog and Order Form
Brand New Release: Man in Denial
Click on each item to learn about:
The Poetry of Roberto Diego
Read about Mr. Diego's book, A PRIMER AGAINST RACISM
New: Individualism by Roberto Diego
New: Dacau and Berlin in 1990