A trap of the president’s making

High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/66b63f8c-1653-11e3-a57d-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz2eO17GOrN

Last week, was arguably the worst of Barack Obama’s presidency. If the wheels are not to come off it altogether, this coming one will need to be among his best – starting on Tuesday night with his address to the nation about Syria.

It is hard to understand how an instinctively cautious president in his fifth year could have manoeuvred himself into such a dismal corner. But his largely self-charted route lends little confidence that he can easily escape it.

Obama urges Syria strike despite G20 Turkey attacks US stance on Syria In depth Syria crisis Podcast Obama’s political gamble on Syria Edward Luce Obama’s battle to win over the House

Obama’s big risk on Syria Edward Luce Obama’s credibility rests on strikes Presidential Leadership and the Creation of the American Era, by Joseph Nye Collision 2012, by Dan Balz

In the next 10 days or so we will find out if Mr Obama will get the chance to recapture his presidential mojo. That – and the fact that he would share the fallout with Congress for whatever complications a Syria strike would present – is the best that can be said for a “Yes” vote. A “No” would irretrievably weaken Mr Obama both at home and abroad. It would qualify as one of the costliest gambles in US presidential history.

TRAP SHOOTING

“It is hard to understand how an instinctively cautious president in his fifth year...”

Caution is the flip side of caprice, thus they are back-to-back, no great distance between for one who is posturing as an experienced global statesman. His is the local community, not the world.

“How exactly did Mr Obama reach this point? It is a question that befuddles even those who know the president well.”

Could he have forgotten, after immeasurable press briefings, that his words are the branches upon which reporters, and world leaders, perch? That words have meaning stretching all the way back to integrity? And that one in his position is held accountable for them? To forget that guiding fact seems more an affliction of the dishonest, those who say what’s convenient or necessary in any given circumstance, as long as what’s said casts the speaker in the most amiable, or in this case, intimidating light.

“Even when he was cornered last year by Hillary Clinton, the then secretary of state, David Petraeus, then director of the Central Intelligence Agency, and Leon Panetta, then defence secretary, Mr Obama rebuffed their advice to take a tougher stand against Bashar al-Assad. “

Did I mention caprice? Caution, yes, for himself; but not for the world’s occupants in conflict and turmoil. He is beholden to his backers and funders, for his image; but hardly to anyone else. Unpracticed in the latter perspective, he truly indicted himself in the attempt. And now his essence is under the microscope with the whole world peering down the tube. (Refer to Greek tragedy for illuminating parallels.)

“Very reluctantly the White House agreed earlier this year to step up small arms supplies to moderate Syrian opposition groups. But it was little more than a press release since none has yet arrived.”

And who is surprised? I just spoke of this brand of dodge. Daniel Greenfield said it best today in his article, The Myth of the Moderate Syrian Rebels, in Front Page Mag:

‘The Syrian Civil War is a religious war. It’s not a war over democracy or freedom. It’s a conflict between two totalitarian systems, one loosely based on a mixture of Islam and Socialism, and the other more rigidly based on Islam. Both are brutal and merciless to anyone who doesn’t belong.’

So, perhaps no moderate rebels could yet be identified that are qualified to receive arms and munitions. Pity, that. Might have to cut him some slack on this one. Or on the other hand, scrutinize him further for such a slick little subterfuge.

“Now we are reassured that there is no hurry whatsoever to strike Syria.”

These little fibs are beginning to add up. I remember being taught in grade school...something about the difficulty of following one with another and how it would become hard to keep track.

‘In spite of his rhetoric, the president only intends a “shot across the bow.” That may be naive, or misleading. But this is probably not a Vietnam in the making.’

Aren’t all the middle eastern wars more similar to Vietnam, than say to WWII? Which have we clearly won? Which have led the subject countries onto a gleaming road toward workable democracy, rather than ongoing sectarian violence? Wasn’t there, allegedly, a shot across the bow in the Gulf of Tonkin? And many more shots a little lower? My, what a peculiar metaphor.

“Likewise, if Mr Obama lost the vote in Congress, the US would still have by far the most powerful military in the world. And it would no more have embraced isolationism than Britain had become the new Switzerland.”

Isn’t it more relevant what you do with the arsenal, rather than simply possessing it? Gun collectors have dens full of weapons, but is it best to solicit them to join the militia? Ahh, they need friends to transport and apply those arms, and share the burden of mustering courage.

“None of Mr Obama’s advisers agreed with his decision to seek Congress’s green light on Syria.”

Isn’t that telling! Caprice multiplied. Is the “methodical” Mr. Obama cracking up? Searching for an escape route (i.e., scapegoat) from his boastful proclamation? Compounding one’s errors seems no respectable extrication. River water is seeping into the pit as he digs it. (And that ain’t no 60’s lingo.)

“Unlike the economy, where he has generally deferred to advisers – sometimes to a fault – on global affairs, Mr Obama trusts his instincts. It is hard to find too many others who strongly share that faith.”

Conclusion: He is an all-around bad decision maker, and probably not well suited to the job.

Diagnosis: He is in survival mode. Anything goes. Caution, unfortunately, is a dead horse. (And beating it is now illegal in some 57 states.) If he is now operating from his survival instincts, everyone nearby should probably run! And I don’t mean run for his office. (Or perhaps I do! This whole Syria venture has rattled my instincts.)

“What it would mean for Syria, and Mr Obama’s ability to handle an escalation, is an open question. He will aim to keep any Syrian engagement to a minimum.”

I would suggest that we withdraw from Syria immediately. Before we even get there. Before the capricious mettle of our imploding president is subject to yet more trials and testing. Syria is too much of a powder keg beneath the belly of Iran and we don’t want that Shiite blowing all over the middle east.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.