A brief perusal of recent foreign policy of events under Obamas presidency reveal a quiet doctrine, not trumpeted on high with lofty rhetoric and chest thumping, but a doctrine that is consistently practiced nonetheless. Furthermore, it has proven cheaper, more successful at advancing American interests, and has steadied the nations standing in the world. Even among those who have good reason to fear American Power. It is a foreign policy that fits the times. It is a leaner form of American global engagement: realistic, flexible, cost-minded, and places diplomacy, not military force as its central component. When military force is used, it is done covertly, secretively, and most important, briefly. Beset with a public that is war weary and more concerned with domestic challenges, the Obama Administrations foreign policy still seeks to preserve American Internationalism and avoid isolationism. However, it is an Internationalism sans the substantial costs in blood and treasure that more ambitious doctrines in Americas past have demonstrated. During the 2009 crisis in Honduras, President Obama called the military coup there illegal, but insisted on resolving the matter through negotiation and diplomacy through the Organization of American States. This proved the correct course of action despite calls among conservatives for stronger, heavy handed intervention. During the 2011 Arab Spring and the upheaval in Egypt, President Obama maintained a position of quiet study while watching events unfold, moving adeptly to deal with the situation as it occurred rather than immediately buttressing Mubarak as many conservatives demanded. Mubarak was doomed, as he had lost support among the people and in the military. Had Obama followed conservative advice, the US would find itself supporting an unloved dictator in the Middle East, yet again. Instead, the president correctly let events unfold without risking a great deal of military power or money. However, President Obama will use military power when it suits his view of American interests. In the 2011 Libyan Civil War, President Obama chose to intervene militarily in concert with other NATO allies. However, American engagement was brief, limited to special forces and naval air power. No American lives were lost and there was minimal financial expense. The aftermath of the Libyan policy is debatable. That country today is a tremendous mess. President Obama was quite clear he wanted the United States to play a very limited role in Libyas rebuilding. But if the goal was to remove the Gaddafi regime from power, that was accomplished very quickly and without tremendous cost. That was most certainly not the case with Iraq and the lofty yet unattainable grand strategy of the Bush Doctrine. The presidents use of military power is designed on small footprint activity: heavy reliance on special forces and covert operations, the use of unmanned aerial drones, and the use of Naval and Marine tactical capability rather than the more massive war postured Army and Air Force. Of course, the signature military accomplishment under President Obama was the killing of Osama bin Laden by special operations forces. That is the quintessential example of the Obama Doctrine on the use of force: cheap, quick, and lethal.
Posted on: Sun, 09 Mar 2014 17:29:29 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015