The largest failure of Obama's approach to the Middle East is its apparent geopolitical randomness. Support for Iran's Green Revolution was late and grudging — as though courageous reformers were intruding on Obama's engagement of the regime. The president dramatically escalated the Afghan War, before conveying an impression of heading for the exits. After wringing its hands, the administration took needed action in Libya. After wringing its hands, it has remained on the sidelines in Syria. The main consistency has been the wringing part.
In the absence of an organizing principle, flexibility becomes ambiguity. Other nations know exactly what Iran is after, what Russia is after, what Israel is after. They are left to guess at American intentions. The risk is that they will cease to care.
michaelgerson@washpost.com.
- My view: Voting member's perspective on the...
- My view: MMR vaccine caused my son's autism
- Letters: Founders' values
- John Florez: Government a big vending machine
- White House press corps has been turned into...
- In our opinion: Leave NCIC alone
- George F. Will: Obama takes a page from...
- The winners and the losers
Subscribe
Mobile
RSS
Guessing?
Apparently you haven't read the news.
I'd much rather have a President who isn't sending us to war than a President like Bush/Romney who want to invade every single country in the ME shoot first and ask More..
Where in the constitution does it say I need to pay for the defense of Israel? It doesn't, therefore the entire idea is unconstitutional.
I'm betting that the US STATE DEPT is also guessing as to what Obama's intentions are. It's hard to give confidence in your foreign policy when you don't have one. Always leading from behind Barack.