The Duplicity of the Obama Foreign Policy

Right From the Start

Right From the Start

As this column is being written, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is preparing to address the United States Congress. I have no idea what is in that speech but I do know two things about the speech. First, it is a speech from a nation that is at greatest risk should Iran acquire nuclear weapons. That is not speculation that is a promise from the demented ayatollahs who run Iran.

And second, it is a speech that will produce more truth and honesty about the explosive nature of the Middle East and the reality of Islamic terrorism than anything you will ever hear from the administration of President Barack Obama. I can never tell whether Mr. Obama’s foreign policy is based upon the two-fold naiveté of America’s far-left or his stubborn belief that we should ignore the obvious when it conflicts with his vision. (The two-fold naiveté of America’s far left is that 1) whatever the problem, it is our fault; and 2) you can pick up dog poop by the clean end – in this instance that the world’s despots can be trusted to do the right thing.) These are routinely on display when anyone in a leadership position in the State Department (lately Secretary John Kerry and his two vacuous spokesmen, Jen Psaki and Marie Harf) speaks.

Mr. Netanyahu recognizes that Israel is being thrown under the proverbial bus in Mr. Obama’s quest to reach a deal with Iran over its ongoing development of nuclear weapons. Like Iraq and Afghanistan, it matters not to Mr. Obama the consequences of a “deal” only that he can claim to have achieved it. It is the sacrifice of reality in pursuit of Obamavision.

But Mr. Netanyahu and Israel are not the only nation to feel the duplicity of Mr. Obama and his State Department. Let’s just run through a few of these before we get to the newest one. When a pro-democracy uprising began in Iran at the outbreak of the so-called Arab Spring, Mr. Obama sat silently while the terrorist regime of the Iranian ayatollahs crushed the rebellion with murderous efficiency. In contrast when the Muslim Brotherhood, a designated terrorist organization rose to power in Egypt and immediately suppressed all opposition, Mr. Obama was moved to praise the advancement of democracy. And when the Muslim Brotherhood’s repressive regime was overthrown a short time later, Mr. Obama threatened to cut off foreign and military aid to the successor regime that has routinely been supportive of the United States and more importantly tolerant of Israel.

Mr. Obama sacrificed Iraqi security by prematurely withdrawing all troops from that conflict before the Iraqi government stabilized and its armed forces matured. At about the same time Mr. Obama promised but subsequently refused to provide support for the Free Syrian Army when it sought to depose the brutal President Bashar al Assad. The result is the murderous assault and growth of the so-called Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

Mr. Obama has steadfastly refused to provide military assistance to the Ukraine despite a treaty in which we guaranteed its security in exchange for destruction of its nuclear arsenal. The invading Russians peeled off the Crimea and are routinely advancing on more and more eastern lands in the Ukraine as a result.

Libya, Sudan, Yemen, oh hell, the entire Middle East has gone up in flames because of the irresoluteness and duplicity of Mr. Obama and his State Department. Having made a mess of that, Mr. Obama has turned his attention to the Americas.

The first casualties were the refugees from the repressive regime of the Castro brothers in Cuba. So anxious was Mr. Obama to claim another headline that he re-established diplomatic relations with the most repressive regime in the Western Hemisphere without a single concession or commitment from them. And in continuing to seek the Castro brothers approval, Mr. Obama has decided to insert himself into negotiations between the elected government of Colombia and the Cuban backed terrorist organization known as Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC).

For those of you forced to endure a teachers union directed education in the Portland Public Schools, Colombia has been in a near constant state of chaos with communist insurgents (backed by Cuba) and the narcotraficantes (backed by unlimited supplies of cocaine) challenging the government and holding rural areas of the country hostage to their own forms of terror. In the 21st Century the Colombian government gained widespread support from its people and significantly curbed the power and presence of the narcotraficantes. At the same time, support for FARC has diminished and the Colombian government has been engaged in negotiations with them to end the conflict. The United States has been a strong supporter of the Colombian government as it stabilizes its country – that is until Mr. Obama arrived.

Now Mr. Obama considers it more important to placate the Castro brothers than to support the democracy in Colombia (which also happens to be at odds with the primary troublemaker in South America – Venezuela, another Cuban client state). The presence of Mr. Obama’s State Department in the Colombian negotiations does not bode well for the Colombian government. As Mary Anastasia O’Grady noted recently in the Wall Street Journal:

“President Obama’s top priority in the region is normalizing relations with the Cuban military dictatorship. Raúl Castro says that cannot happen unless Cuba is taken off the list of state sponsors of terrorism—even though the regime supports the FARC and gives members of its rebel army safe haven.“So the only way to fix the problem is to change the definition of the FARC through a peace agreement that the Colombian people approve. U.S. involvement is intended to raise the odds of that happening.

“Colombians, beware. The U.S. will be eager to put its stamp on a peace deal, no matter how much political or economic power it cedes to the FARC. But once it’s done, Colombians will be on their own. If things go wrong, nobody is going to pull their civil liberties out of the fire.”

And if you think that such concern is unwarranted, just ask the Venezuelan people, the Ukrainian people, the Yemeni government, the Free Syrian Army, the Israeli people and the myriad of other freedom loving people that Mr. Obama has stabbed in the back. So distrustful of Mr. Obama are the Israelis and the Egyptians that they froze the Obama administration out of the process that ended the active military conflict between Israel and Hamas (an Iranian backed terrorist organization). Resolution of the conflict including the terms were a complete surprise to Secretary Kerry and Mr. Obama.

It is the kind of action that has caused our allies to distrust us and our enemies to no longer fear us.

But what does this have to do with Hillary Clinton? Haven’t you been paying attention? With the exception of Cuba and the Colombians, all of this occurred during her watch as Secretary of State.