Were in the year 2018 and Obamas legacy" is a thing of the past. For what its worth I will outline some thoughts in retrospect about the former presidents first steps that prefigured his foreign policy in the years that followed.
It was the year 2009 and it was official. The Obama administration shelved the anti-missile shield from Poland and Czech Republic and let it marinate in the attic jar. The move was done with an unparalleled subtlety during the same day when Poland was commemorating 70 years from its World War Two invasion by Germany and soon after by the Soviet Union. After months of ballet pirouettes in public statements where the Eastern Europeans were „reassured" that their concerns on the issue were totally groundless the inevitable (and predictable) happened. The Obama administration citing budgetary reasons upended the agreements with two N.A.T.O. allies by cancelling the Bush-era project that angered Russia.
In turn the administration officials gave blurry promises for a „better defense" against the nuclear wannabe Iran. The reactions were quick to follow. Said Lech Walesa former president of Poland: „I could tell from what I saw what kind of policies President Obama cultivates. I simply dont like this policy not because this shield was required in Poland but because of the way we were treated."
Did this popped out as a big surprise considering Obamas „new philosophy" of appeasing Russia? Not really. Starting with the Russian invasion of Georgia in August 2008 Obama had been in a constant crusade of „resetting" the relationship with the Russian „partner" at the expense of his unsuspecting allies.
Never mind the Eastern European allies contribution for the war against terrorism. In February 2003 French president Jacques Chirac scolded Eastern Europe for becoming the Trojan horse" for U.S. interests in Europe when 13 countries in the region (seven of which were being E.U. candidates) signed two public letters of support for the American stance on Iraq. Eventually Romania and Bulgaria had to wait until January 2007 for their full E.U. membership. By mid-2005 Poland and Romania were among the top five non-U.S. military forces in Iraq with almost 1000-person contingents each being topped only by U.K. South Korea and Australia.
In the meantime Obama was vigorously shaping his own policies by initiating not necessarily in this chronological order the following landmark activities: surrounding himself with 30 something tax-payer-supported non-accountable-to-Congress radical-left ideologues a.k.a. „the czars"; lifting the embargo with communist Cuba; patting the back of Hugo Chavez the then-socialist dictator of Venezuela at international meetings; having an apologetic Middle East tour and bowing to the Saudi monarch; agreeing to a humanitarian-cause-related photo op between former president Bill Clinton and North Koreas communist dictator Kim Jong-il.
He also sent State Secretary Hillary Clinton to extensive and exhausting tours to some of the presidents familiar places like Africa and South-East Asia while Vice President Joe „Loudmouth" Biden was creating Saturday Night Live titles during his famous Ukrainian tour along with castigating the then-constitutional abiding Honduran administration for expelling the former president Jos Manuel „Brother O Chavez" Zelaya. In addition he froze or downgraded the national defense capabilities. Oh and let us not forget he kept a low profile during the Iran post-election mass demonstrations against the same nuclear wannabe regime whose potential attacks the Eastern European shield was initially designed against.
Ironically reasons for Obama to amend his policies were coming from all over the place. In January 2009 the Italian geopolitical journal LIMES published an article about „EuRussia" accompanied by a map of Europe titled Obamas Nightmare. The MAP has four country blocs highlighted in various colors: Russia and its „partners" (in yellow and orange: the CIS and some Western states) its „Axis friends" (in red: most of the West European states) „neutral states" (in green: Turkey and some Balkan states) and its „enemies" (in blue: Great Britain Sweden the Baltic states Poland Romania and Georgia).
Also in June-July the same year German Marshall Fund sampled 12 European states (seven Western and five Eastern including Turkey) on Obamas policies and reached some paradoxical conclusions (published in September 2009): in Eastern Europe pro-American attitudes were in the high 70 and „Obamamania" was at mid-60 while in Western Europe „Obamamania" was at mid-90.
In July 2009 president Obama was addressed an open letter signed by 22 prominent Eastern European leaders who voiced their concern that the region had ceased to be a priority on the U.S. foreign policy agenda. The letter warned against „the misguided notion" that the region was largely stable and on a secure path to full trans-Atlantic integration. In reality this traditional pro-American region was increasingly critical to the United States cave in to Russias „revisionist power pursuing a 19th-century agenda with 21st-century tactics."
Amazing isnt it?
Had the administration wanted to show contempt for some faithful allies in Eastern Europe there was no better way than scrapping the planned anti-missile shield. It was obvious that at that moment and even later the United States did not consider Central and Eastern Europe as a priority any more. Russia had gained and therefore was about to feel more empowered. But the Americans do not need to be patted on the back by the Russians and be told „Good job!". Was this a quid pro quo? Most probably not. Andrej Nesterenko the then-spokesperson of the Russian Foreign Affair was quick in denying the existence of a „secret deal." In any case if Russia had pulled out its troops from Georgia there would have been genuine reasons to suspect a quid pro quo.
Should the Obama administration have contemplated a relocation of the anti-missile shield anywhere else? Turkey and Israel would not have cut it for a quid pro quo. Romania or Azerbaijan maybe. But here is the most disturbing thing: if the Pentagon official explanation for abandoning the plan had resided solely on the information that the Iranians did not have the capability to develop nuclear weapons earlier than three to five years when the latest news in the media showed the contrary then all that would have appeared as a humongous lame albeit cynical excuse for the American public opinion.
In fact this was Obamas free gift to the Russians offered with a red bow on a golden plate way before the September 2012 presidents tete-a-tete with Medvedev at the Seoul nuclear safety summit and during his open mike" genuine moment of sincerity.
While it was being obvious that the U.S. world policy had turned 180 degrees since Obama assumed the office Russian policy continued to look disturbingly unchanged.
In terms of first-hand knowledge of communism America should have given more credit to Eastern Europe. After all the Eastern Europeans deeper understanding of the multiple facets -- theoretical clinical and practical -- of a totalitarian ideology and society exceeds by far Obamas occasional exotic incursions in the Marxism-pigmented readings during his university years. And this goes for Obamas both international and domestic policies. His obstinacy to promote collectivist ideas of a fair share" type has managed to produce confusion in America and hilarity in Eastern Europe. In this context Jimmy Carters 1977 remarks about being „free of that inordinate fear of communism" appear as an equally sinister and pathetic joke.
Obama began his mandate thinking he would „change" the American society and hoped he looked like the super-hero of Independence Day played by Will Smith or the visionary president in Deep Impact played by Morgan Freeman. It didnt happen. When he alienated the allies by allying himself with the aliens he ended up looking like the goofy president Camacho in Idiocracy played by Terry Crews. In the end even Camacho came back to his senses.
Let us all hope that we as a nation do not end up living those idiocratic" apocalyptic times.
NOTE - A version of the article was published previously in AMERICAN THINKER.
The article was featured in WARSAW POINT (Poland) with 30000 views!!! and INOSMI (Russia) in Russian.
Tiberiu Dianu has published several books and a host of articles in law politics and post-communist societies. He currently lives and works in Washington DC and can be followed on MEDIUM.
*****
Were in the year 2018 and Obamas legacy" is a thing of the past. For what its worth I will outline some thoughts in retrospect about the former presidents first steps that prefigured his foreign policy in the years that followed.
It was the year 2009 and it was official. The Obama administration shelved the anti-missile shield from Poland and Czech Republic and let it marinate in the attic jar. The move was done with an unparalleled subtlety during the same day when Poland was commemorating 70 years from its World War Two invasion by Germany and soon after by the Soviet Union. After months of ballet pirouettes in public statements where the Eastern Europeans were „reassured" that their concerns on the issue were totally groundless the inevitable (and predictable) happened. The Obama administration citing budgetary reasons upended the agreements with two N.A.T.O. allies by cancelling the Bush-era project that angered Russia.
In turn the administration officials gave blurry promises for a „better defense" against the nuclear wannabe Iran. The reactions were quick to follow. Said Lech Walesa former president of Poland: „I could tell from what I saw what kind of policies President Obama cultivates. I simply dont like this policy not because this shield was required in Poland but because of the way we were treated."
Did this popped out as a big surprise considering Obamas „new philosophy" of appeasing Russia? Not really. Starting with the Russian invasion of Georgia in August 2008 Obama had been in a constant crusade of „resetting" the relationship with the Russian „partner" at the expense of his unsuspecting allies.
Never mind the Eastern European allies contribution for the war against terrorism. In February 2003 French president Jacques Chirac scolded Eastern Europe for becoming the Trojan horse" for U.S. interests in Europe when 13 countries in the region (seven of which were being E.U. candidates) signed two public letters of support for the American stance on Iraq. Eventually Romania and Bulgaria had to wait until January 2007 for their full E.U. membership. By mid-2005 Poland and Romania were among the top five non-U.S. military forces in Iraq with almost 1000-person contingents each being topped only by U.K. South Korea and Australia.
In the meantime Obama was vigorously shaping his own policies by initiating not necessarily in this chronological order the following landmark activities: surrounding himself with 30 something tax-payer-supported non-accountable-to-Congress radical-left ideologues a.k.a. „the czars"; lifting the embargo with communist Cuba; patting the back of Hugo Chavez the then-socialist dictator of Venezuela at international meetings; having an apologetic Middle East tour and bowing to the Saudi monarch; agreeing to a humanitarian-cause-related photo op between former president Bill Clinton and North Koreas communist dictator Kim Jong-il.
He also sent State Secretary Hillary Clinton to extensive and exhausting tours to some of the presidents familiar places like Africa and South-East Asia while Vice President Joe „Loudmouth" Biden was creating Saturday Night Live titles during his famous Ukrainian tour along with castigating the then-constitutional abiding Honduran administration for expelling the former president Jos Manuel „Brother O Chavez" Zelaya. In addition he froze or downgraded the national defense capabilities. Oh and let us not forget he kept a low profile during the Iran post-election mass demonstrations against the same nuclear wannabe regime whose potential attacks the Eastern European shield was initially designed against.
Ironically reasons for Obama to amend his policies were coming from all over the place. In January 2009 the Italian geopolitical journal LIMES published an article about „EuRussia" accompanied by a map of Europe titled Obamas Nightmare. The MAP has four country blocs highlighted in various colors: Russia and its „partners" (in yellow and orange: the CIS and some Western states) its „Axis friends" (in red: most of the West European states) „neutral states" (in green: Turkey and some Balkan states) and its „enemies" (in blue: Great Britain Sweden the Baltic states Poland Romania and Georgia).
Also in June-July the same year German Marshall Fund sampled 12 European states (seven Western and five Eastern including Turkey) on Obamas policies and reached some paradoxical conclusions (published in September 2009): in Eastern Europe pro-American attitudes were in the high 70 and „Obamamania" was at mid-60 while in Western Europe „Obamamania" was at mid-90.
In July 2009 president Obama was addressed an open letter signed by 22 prominent Eastern European leaders who voiced their concern that the region had ceased to be a priority on the U.S. foreign policy agenda. The letter warned against „the misguided notion" that the region was largely stable and on a secure path to full trans-Atlantic integration. In reality this traditional pro-American region was increasingly critical to the United States cave in to Russias „revisionist power pursuing a 19th-century agenda with 21st-century tactics."
Amazing isnt it?
Had the administration wanted to show contempt for some faithful allies in Eastern Europe there was no better way than scrapping the planned anti-missile shield. It was obvious that at that moment and even later the United States did not consider Central and Eastern Europe as a priority any more. Russia had gained and therefore was about to feel more empowered. But the Americans do not need to be patted on the back by the Russians and be told „Good job!". Was this a quid pro quo? Most probably not. Andrej Nesterenko the then-spokesperson of the Russian Foreign Affair was quick in denying the existence of a „secret deal." In any case if Russia had pulled out its troops from Georgia there would have been genuine reasons to suspect a quid pro quo.
Should the Obama administration have contemplated a relocation of the anti-missile shield anywhere else? Turkey and Israel would not have cut it for a quid pro quo. Romania or Azerbaijan maybe. But here is the most disturbing thing: if the Pentagon official explanation for abandoning the plan had resided solely on the information that the Iranians did not have the capability to develop nuclear weapons earlier than three to five years when the latest news in the media showed the contrary then all that would have appeared as a humongous lame albeit cynical excuse for the American public opinion.
In fact this was Obamas free gift to the Russians offered with a red bow on a golden plate way before the September 2012 presidents tete-a-tete with Medvedev at the Seoul nuclear safety summit and during his open mike" genuine moment of sincerity.
While it was being obvious that the U.S. world policy had turned 180 degrees since Obama assumed the office Russian policy continued to look disturbingly unchanged.
In terms of first-hand knowledge of communism America should have given more credit to Eastern Europe. After all the Eastern Europeans deeper understanding of the multiple facets -- theoretical clinical and practical -- of a totalitarian ideology and society exceeds by far Obamas occasional exotic incursions in the Marxism-pigmented readings during his university years. And this goes for Obamas both international and domestic policies. His obstinacy to promote collectivist ideas of a fair share" type has managed to produce confusion in America and hilarity in Eastern Europe. In this context Jimmy Carters 1977 remarks about being „free of that inordinate fear of communism" appear as an equally sinister and pathetic joke.
Obama began his mandate thinking he would „change" the American society and hoped he looked like the super-hero of Independence Day played by Will Smith or the visionary president in Deep Impact played by Morgan Freeman. It didnt happen. When he alienated the allies by allying himself with the aliens he ended up looking like the goofy president Camacho in Idiocracy played by Terry Crews. In the end even Camacho came back to his senses.
Let us all hope that we as a nation do not end up living those idiocratic" apocalyptic times.
NOTE - A version of the article was published previously in AMERICAN THINKER.
The article was featured in WARSAW POINT (Poland) with 30000 views!!! and INOSMI (Russia) in Russian.
Tiberiu Dianu has published several books and a host of articles in law politics and post-communist societies. He currently lives and works in Washington DC and can be followed on MEDIUM.
*****
