I’m a genocide chick. ~ Samantha Power, senior director for multilateral affairs, National Security Council
Obama believes American power did more harm than good and that global interests must come before American interests. He believes in International law being considered by American courts. Washington should not act without the cooperation of the world community. America must reach out to everyone, even the unreachable. This is the Obama Doctrine.
The National Security Strategy (NSS) is a 30,000 word document which gave it official status.
It downplays American values. Freedom and liberty appear 14 times compared to the Bush NSS which mention those core principles 110 times. The Obama administration does not want to offend rogue regimes.
Obama did continue the wars, launched his drone program, and America’s relationship with Europe has not improved, leaving liberals speechless.
The doctrine has its roots in the Cold War with many believing America’s superpower role is too expensive and too risky.
Barack Obama’s thinking was greatly influenced by Samantha Power who burst on the foreign policy scene with her book, A Problem from Hell, which indicted America and other democracies for being “bystanders to genocide.” She is a Harvard brainiac who hangs with Hollywood liberals.
She volunteered to work with Obama in his Senate office and it was instant mind meld. She became his closest foreign policy adviser.
She campaigned for Obama, but made the mistake of calling Hillary Clinton a monster.
She had to resign from the Obama campaign but she later became part of his transition team and now she serves on the National Security Council.
Power was a supporter of the mea culpa policy as part of the rethinking she wanted to see. She wanted Obama to get down on one knee for all the harm America has done. We also must undo the harm we have done, particularly in the Middle East, she opined. Obama had to disentangle the U.S. from Israel.
She said, “So much of (the debate over the Middle East) is about: ‘Is [Obama] going to be good for the Jews,”‘ she complained. She saw investing in Palestine as the path to go down.
When Obama bowed to the Saudi King and gave his speech in Cairo, it rang of Samantha Power. He presented himself as a bastion of religious tolerance, so far superior to his subjects who are hostile to human rights. His speech also over-counted the number of Muslims in this country by three times when he said there were 7 to 10 million Muslims here. He wanted to over-value their contributions.
The words “Islam” or “Islamic terror” are forbidden from use in federal law enforcement training manuals. Obama ordered his advisers to remove the term “Islamic extremism” from the central document outlining America’s National Security Strategy.
The Rise of the Humanitarian Vulcans
This administration is leading from behind and sees the relative power of the U.S. as declining while China’s power rises.
Libya accentuated the glaring inconsistencies in the Obama Doctrine. Why did he do it?
Obama’s handing of foreign policy appeared amateurish and confused in light of the Arab Spring as opinion polls showed. He appeared to lack the courage of his convictions. Hillary Clinton is said to have referred to Obama and his advisers as a “bunch of amateurs.” Obama appeared to be fiddling while the Arab world burned.
Power was being ignored and got herself back into the fray by pushing Obama towards war with Libya under the faux humanitarian doctrine – R2P or Responsibility to Protect. The Stratfor CEO called her strategy, The Immaculate Intervention.
Power and the US Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, would not be swayed against their humanitarian intervention plan.
Hillary threw her support behind the idea. Obama, with his usual indecisiveness, plunged into a war that was not a war. He supported regime change in Libya without declaring that as a goal of American policy. He said he was opposed to Bush-era policies of nation building but he helped create the new Libyan government. He rejected America’s role as a guarantor of world order and ‘lead from behind’ with NATO in the lead, as one of his adviser’s described it.
Obama’s Libyan campaign was considered a success despite the rise of extreme and revolutionary Islamism in Libya and other countries upturned by the Arab Spring.
Was Obama successful in foreign policy? He cannot claim to have achieved a single lasting policy objective in any area of the world that is of vital interest to the United States.
He has watched as a helpless bystander while the EU disintegrates. His withdrawal from Iraq, so poorly executed, left a vacuum that is being filled by our enemies in Iran.
Afghanistan was the “war of necessity” but then set a date for departure so the enemy just needed to wait for the clock to run out.
The Obama Doctrine with its two policies of “leading from behind” and “responsibility to protect” are naive and simplistic.
Assad is slaughtering civilians but somehow intervention is not needed for humanitarian reasons.
Obama sees a diminshed U.S. with a reigning New World Order to include the US, China, Europe, Japan, Russia and India.