Obama's Ideas on Foreign Policy Lack Luster

My living room, like many I imagine, fell silent after last Friday's presidential debate ticked to a close. The question on everyone's mind: Why had Obama not delivered the knock-out punch?

Here's my take, even though it pains me to say it: On foreign policy, Obama appears to have no new ideas. He is partially recycling his past eureka moments, while partially aping some of the Bush administration's recent successes. After all, he still hammers us with his shrewd foresight on the Iraq war. But that was a decision he made over six years ago -- why hold that up as your main qualification to be president? He talks on end about negotiating with any head of state without preconditions (but with preparations) -- a pronouncement that was groundbreaking when he first made it over a year ago. And he loves to mention his foresight on the hubbub in Pakistan, and Washington's right to pursue terrorists there if Islamabad is unable or unwilling to take them out. But again, this was last summer's news (and besides, Sarah Palin seems to support your policy, so how wise can it be?).

These ideas have lost their oomph among discerning voters. No one is likely to vote for you because you want to break bread with Hugo Chavez or bomb the bejesus out of Waziristan. How have your thoughts evolved? Or maybe they haven't? To say that you will sit down with the Iranians is nothing short of the status quo (we are already talking with the Iranians).

Moreover, to keep beating the Iraq-is-distracting-us-from-capturing-bin-Laden drum is the same dull beat we heard from John Kerry in 2004. If Americans were unconvinced then, when the Iraq war was a shambles, why would they soak up this Democratic talking point now? Plus, every terrorism expert I talk to says capturing Bin Laden will do next to nothing to cripple al-Qaeda -- so why this obsession over offing him, at the expense of addressing other serious issues? Plus, while I'm happy you are not blindly kneeling before the David Petraeus-is-god altar, your plan to just send more U.S. forces to Afghanistan is not sufficient. More troops in harm's way, after all, would just mean more American and Afghan civilian casualties, which would translate into greater anti-U.S. sentiment and more terrorists in the long run. That is not to say more troops are not needed, but how will you, Obama, specifically cajole our NATO allies to join the cause in greater numbers? You were mum on this issue in Berlin, you were mum on this issue last Friday night. Speak up.

On the Caucasus, you appear to be drinking from the same pro-Georgia punch bowl as the neocons. Just curious: How will that help you win swing voters again? Listen, you cannot upset Russia at the expense of recklessly enlarging NATO, or just let anyone into the alliance willy-nilly, as McCain wants. That would destroy the central tenets upon which NATO was founded and force the Russian Bear into the corner. It's an idea hatched in a few think-tanks stuffed with conservatives who think Misha Saakashvili's mug should be carved into Mount Rushmore. The smoke emanating from Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov's normally cool head last week in New York should have been a hint.

Finally, Obama, I'd tone down the America-is-unexceptional rhetoric. I agree with you in principle, especially given the latest bout of bad news from Wall Street and Washington, but you come off sounding too Jimmy Carter-like when you say "We have weakened our capacity to project power around the world because we have viewed everything through this single lens." You might as well don a sweater and hector us about America's "malaise" in the world. It takes true talent to turn McCain into the shiny optimist in this campaign but that is what you will do if you don't project an air of optimism and unfurl some of those our-best-days-are-ahead-of-us lines that Americans love.

We need to hear more from you, Barack -- more ideas, more energy, more optimism. You are at your best when you speak off-the-cuff. Your answers as of late are too measured, too calculating -- your ideas, especially on foreign policy, lack newness. You exude confidence but not wisdom. Yes, you were against invading Iraq. But besides supporting a withdrawal, what else do you stand for today? Sorry to say, but just repeating the same old gobbledygook--we need to "have a broader strategic vision about all the challenges that we face"--is not going to get you into the White House. Think outside the Beltway.

Comments

[JeanPaulSatire]

Tell me: what's wrong with THIS post? What do HuffPo censors find objectionable about it and keep spiking it??

"He is partially recycling his past eureka moments, while partially aping some of the Bush administration's recent successes."

Utter nonsense. Bush has actually taken to co-opting Obama's ideas, although he does it without crediting Obama. (Cross-border raids into Pakistan, or negotiating with the North Koreans and Iranians, anyone?)

More importantly, you seem to think that because an idea is no longer "fresh" (whatever that means), one should put it on a shelf or in long-term storage -- even if it's clearly the best approach. Should we also change 2 + 2 = 4 to become 2 + 2 = 5, simply because the former lacks novelty? The logical extension of this kind of thinking would have us discard the principles set out in the Declaration of Independence, for example, simply because they haven't been 'new' for more than two centuries.

[LVDantana]

Obama will be an improvement regardless over Bush or the new 3rd term the GOP wants but we need to get some spine and get out of all this countries that we shouldnt have been in the 1st place! Lets get the Dems in the majority they need and lean on them to do the right thing!

[PhDiva]

Foreign policy doesn't need to be shiny. It needs to be intelligent. Obama's foreign policy is intelligent.

[JeanPaulSatire]

Obama should say, "Thanks, but no thanks on that shiny new stuff; I'll stick with stuff that works."

[Ciganka]

Obama provided a foreign policy overview and once again, foreign policy is a complex issue that just can't hit the sound bite. However, his overall message is quite clear on this - he is going to put America back on the track of diplomacy, including very sound public diplomacy.

America has a magnificent foreign service and this foreign service has suffered during the Bush regime. This is the same foreign service that advised repeatedly against the war in Iraq. This is the foreign service that help America rebuild her shattered reputation.

This is the same foreign service that will promote the idea of a US education to international students at a time when we are moving into competition with the European Union in terms of attracting the best and brightest students from abroad, especially those that will be future leaders in their home countries. In addition the US higher education community is working on study abroad projects so that our own students at colleges and universities are able to spend a semester or more of their education abroad as well.
Diplomacy is critical for America at this time and Obama repeatedly speaks about diplomacy. He made very clear, particularly in his reference to his father, that he is going to begin by building on the strengths that America still has and then move America forward until we finally regain much of the ground we have lost.

[Azrblogger]

Foreign Policy as Teddy said is the carrot and the stick.

But its is really a split carrot and a split stick.

That is you offer the carrot to both enemies and friends and your stick you have isn't only using armed forces but duplicity, subtrefuge, infiltration, and the armed forces provide the intimidation. The old adage that applies here is "you keep you friends close but your enemies closer"

The GOP is right about the culture war but the American culture is not the battleground. The righteous in this whole wide "world" who I will refer to as redneck book thumping moralists. They are the ones who are actually seem to be at war with the rest of us. They strap bombs on themselves and drive trucks into buildings. They plot and they plan all in Gods name

Almost anyone who wins in November has the benefit of not being GWB. They can change direction and do things that W actually couldn't do. McCain spent to much time talking about the surge which Obama admitted is working beyond his wildest imagination. Obama who didn't seem to want to sound like McCain addressed not diplomacy but the concerns of the voters.

Either of them who wins will have their hands full. Merely speaking to your enemy and especially your friends doesn't get them to do what you want.

Maybe they should get a stick shaped like a carrot.

[GiggidyGeshmoygen]

i would love to hear obama lay out his first major foreign policy initiative, embarking on an extensive campaign to repair the damage to America's reputation and restore her to some of her former luster

President Obama and his Secretary of State would immediately begin to schedule a series of meetings with foreign leaders, extending a new hand of friendship and cooperation to those we agree with as well as those with whom we do not always agree, based on mutual global interests and prosperity

that sounds positively lustrous, doesn't it ?

[waltontynerross]

Save it for the post-election, pal. The lines in the sand have been drawn, and you simply shouldn't waste your breath bashing the only viable candidate who MIGHT govern responsibility until he, in fact, has been chosen to govern. Of course there is always Nader for the hopeless cynics out there, you know the guy that did perhaps more than anything to bring us George Bush in 2000. Thanks Ralph!

[Grisu79]

Sorry, but foreign policy should be about serious politics and not some crazy ideas which create luster.

I'm german and I've watched the first presidential debate completely. In my opinion Obama is 100% on the right track when it comes to foreign policy. America and Europe must have a strong partnership to speak with one voice against e.g. Iran.

At the moment the american credibility, when it comes to foreign policy, is close to cero when you ask "main-street" europe. You elect JohnMcCain this will just stay so for the next years. You elect Obama you'll have a realistic chance to re-establish a good partnership between our two continents (wich need each other) and that is what we need.

the second point Obama is right about is your total focus on Iraq and he is right about that this is one good reason for the new strength of russia and china. Putin knows very well that european "main-street" does not trust the american foreign policy. Therefore the european leaders have major problems to stand side by side with the americans when it comes to conflicts like Georgia.

[GunnyJ]

Thank you. Sometimes we look no farther than we can spit for what is really going on!

[ameman]

As if most Americans who vote give a f**@@ about the details of foreign policy. Does he look like a commander in chief? Check. Does he look like he will kick ass if America is threatened? Check. Will he take care of the soldiers? Check. Will he stop the terrorists? Check. Will he be reckless like George Bush? No.

Then Obama will be the next president

Spare most voting Americans the details. They don't give a f#@** about luster and details.

When he gets into office republish this article.

[darker]

I agree with your comments.

Obama is NOT A BANDWAGON JUMP ON GUY.
Obama actually THINKS before he ACTS.
Obama is NOT Bush and NOT McCain.
Obama is NOT "just for show".

He'll have foreign policy streamlined and truly effective.
Bush & Company didn't want ANY foreign policy to work!
they wanted ANY EXCUSE FOR WAR!

no more years for corrupt republican liars.
we can't afford it.

[DuPageDem]

So, because Obama has served as the de facto Secretary of State for the past 6-8 months, with the Bush administration co-opting just about every one of his positions, that means his ideas are old and stale? McCain's habit of blurting out contradictory crap at random moments sure is a lot more exciting. And dangerous. I'll take steady, common-sense pragmatism over needless drama, thank you.

[zenx98]

We have had quite enough of grand pronouncements, narratives and pre-emptive war doctrines hatched from half-baked pseudo intellectual cartels with the complicity of military industrial complex THANK YOU VERY MUCH!!! And now we find the Republic teetering on third world debtor nation status, reviled for it's militaristic simplicity and feared for it' tunnel vision policies thanks to mythological manipulations from lawyers with guns and money burning up the coatrooms with cigar smoke
All the braggadoccio in the world your Patton's, McArthurs' Bush' Cheney's et al, pale in comparison to the cool headed leadership exuded by Eisenhower as he marshalled the disparate egos and political machinations playing behind the scenes to co-ordinate the greatest military exercise of WWII. There is more than enough grunt work repair work to be done in SOOOOO many political arena's that the mere notion of some magnificent remaking of the world order being required at this point in time reflects a fundamental ignorance of current world affairs and more pointedly a profound ignorance of the position and power of the United States in the dispensation of world affairs.
To his credit Obama has maintained a measured presence, stressing the engagement and re-evaluation.

[CostaDelBarto]

"Moreover, to keep beating the Iraq-is-distracting-us-from-capturing-bin-Laden drum is the same dull beat we heard from John Kerry in 2004."

But that's actually true of course.

I can tell you from Australia, where I live, Obama's foreign policy is not the one lacking lustre.

[edgarallenpoe]

McCain's ideas on foreign policy aren't stale because he makes them up fresh every day.

[Zenfull]

If you have read Obama's books, you understand the man's world-view and his judgment. I agree with many other comments here, what Obama has learned that in a debate or other short exposure opportunity to a national audience, there is no way he should try to provide the kind of detailed ideas he has presented in Audacity of Hope on Foreign Policy -- he needs to play it safe at this point. Yeah, I was waiting for him to slam McCain on the Trillion dollar mess of the Iraq War and it's impact on our economy and that it is the result that Osama bin Laden was hoping for, etc. --- too nuanced, too detailed, too complicated -- when most of the undecided or low-information voters haven't really read or listened to any detailed speech or written document by Obama -- they are sizing him up emotionally, not intellectually. They want to know can they trust him, will he act decisively, is he Real, will he understand "their needs", is he really a socialist. or Muslim?

[8IZENUF]

Beehner, many of us know you are wrong about needing new ideas. We need a leader with the courage and wisdom to act on the ideas presented. We have stayed the course too long. And now it's time to act on the ideas of Obama, whether they are six years old or six hours old.

[larry278]

True, 8.... Obama is a vast improvment over W. He has to deal with a melt down & W's wars. Obama will fill the post of Secty of State to do diplomacy. Can the gratutious criticism till we see who'll be Obama's Secty of State.

[PhantomAviator]

..

If he doesn't say the Hillaryy CLinton line he won't be elected. We need a new leader, not ideas that prevent him from being elected.

.

[kfdan]

"On foreign policy, Obama appears to have no new ideas. He is partially recycling his past eureka moments, while partially aping some of the Bush administration's recent successes"

I'm afraid I'm with you on this one! Obama may be playing possum so he can pick up more votes. It will be interesting to see if he can really define his positions so that they represent the very best the nation can offer! We really need an FDR!