James Carroll believes, against public opinion, and even the prevailing media opinion, that President Obama is succeeding in foreign policy. His case? Syria is rid of chemical weapons. Well, bravo. Back before the re-election (before even Benghazi), I believed that Obama's foreign policy was poor and Romney should have gone after it. The fact of the matter was there wasn't a single ally that we had a better relationship with than when he took over (many saw relations decline), and the headway we'd made with our enemies had amounted to nothing.
He had arguably two accomplishments--capturing Bin Laden, which isn't really foreign policy and getting rid of Qaddafi. Libya hasn't worked out since.
Now, in his second term, things are more obvious. Few would argue that his foreign policy, if he has a coherent plan, has been successful.
Let's be clear, the fact that Syria no longer has chemical weapons is a success. It's a very good thing. Let's not forget, though, that Obama and Kerry sort of bungled their way into it. Also, concentrating on the chemical weapons allowed a civil war where more than 160,000 people have died to continue. It's not exactly a huge win here.
No comments:
Post a Comment