Z, American foreign policy priorities are, for better or for worse, a ton more complicated than the last four years. American foreign aid is within an order of magnitude of that to about a dozen other countries. Yeah, maybe Obama could state a clear agenda for each of those dozen, or each of the top 20, or 30, or whatever, but he'd probably be at odds with half of each country other way. Making snap decisions in diplomacy -- and in diplomacy, a decision in even a year is often a snap decision -- just often leads to no good. I'm not going to say that Obama's doing a particularly good job vis-à-vis Egypt; I really don't know. But in a country with a history of making the worst decisions in foreign policy over the last few decades, I'm happy enough with him not making the worst. Probably a low bar to set, but, I'm not really the one setting it. The fact that foreign policy is a lot more complicated these days should set the bar higher.
I will grant you that snap decisions in diplomacy probably aren't prudent. Like I said, the current revolution in Egypt is young, and the State Dept. under Obama's watch might be excused for taking its sweet little time deciding what to do.
But based on all the other foreign policy "achievements" under Obama, you would have to "keep the bar low" in order to be impressed by anything he does these days. Is that better than flinging bombs? Perhaps, until we reach a point where we're forced to, and then we can ask ourselves once again, "What did we miss?"
Tenchusatsu |
