Obama administration attempts to sweeten relations with Iran and Russia, especially by refraining from installing missile defenses in Eastern Europe, did not succeed except to sour relations with U.S. regional allies. When Sec. of State Clinton arrived, Russia told her it Russia was ready to start up Iranian nuclear reactors though the U.S. is trying to restrict Iran’s economy. Turkey, Brazil, and China each snubbed the U.S. drive for sanctions against Iran. Russia does not cooperate with that drive. U.S. requests to Syria and N. Korea to stop using terrorism and stop developing weapons of mass-destruction have failed. President Obama’s speech calling for improved relations with Islamic countries alienated Israeli affection [by negatively misrepresenting Israeli and Jewish history and by proposing to sacrifice Israeli national interests]. Now there is a U.S.-Israel rift.
China is criticizing the U.S. for asking it to up-value its currency, for selling arms to Taiwan, and for meeting with the Dalai Lama. The U.S. also presses China not to restrict Internet access and to reduce carbon emission.
The first example of a setback for U.S. diplomacy was give as, “Vice-President Joe Biden’s trip to Israel last week was poisoned upon touchdown with news that Israel will proceed with new settlements in East Jerusalem – a direct challenge to the peace process advocated by Washington.”
On the positive side, the U.S. is helping Pakistan by liquidating prominent terrorists that it feels endanger it, so Pakistan is providing the U.S. information on prominent terrorists that the U.S. feels endanger the war effort in Afghanistan. The U.S. also has greatly reduced injuries to Pakistani civilians in raids on terrorists. Previously, Pakistani intelligence restricted cooperation with the U.S. .
Also, Russia may sign some anti-terrorism agreements with the U.S.
The reporters cite the observation by Kurt Volker, a former State Dept. official, that the Administration fails to anticipate reactions to its diplomacy (Jay Solomon and Peter Spiegel, Wall St. J., 3/20, A8).
This diplomatic stew needs interpretation. The ex-State Dept. official’s observation should include domestic policy and bills that have unintended but foreseeable consequences. In this broader context, Administration ideology is self-centered and wishful thinking. The U.S. should figure out how much clout it has before tangling with other countries. Then the U.S. could accomplish something without other plans backfiring or failure making the U.S. look weak.
The new cooperation with Pakistan is most significant, if it continues. Agreements signed with Russia would be significant Russia is sincere and the agreements produce valuable results. That remains to be seen.
Some U.S. positions are the kind of human rights efforts that show the finest side of the U.S., still the best hope for the world. Others, such as asking China to raise the value of its currency, to make trading fairer, while the U.S. degrades the value of its currency to make trading less fair, should have been seen as hypocritical and unlikely to sway a great power such as China, so much of whose assets are invested in bonds in U.S. currency whose value the U.S. keeps eroding.
As Obama sells out Israel, he may get some temporary Muslim plaudits, but if he still has the U.S. stand in the way of jihad, the U.S. will have gained no Muslim support and lost Israeli support.
The reporters’ description of the U.S.-Israel rift seems biased. They should know by now from opinion columns of their own paper that the rift was fabricated and exaggerated by the Obama administration. They nevertheless repeat as if a reason for the rift the Administration’s stated pretext for the rift.
Their wording also gives away their slant. They call “new settlements” what are additional houses in an established neighborhood in a major city. They mistakenly situate the new houses in eastern Jerusalem, though it has been pointed out that those houses are in northeastern Jerusalem and were not acquired by the defeat of Jordanian aggression in 1967, as was eastern Jerusalem. They call the area the same as do the Arabs and the State Dept., “East Jerusalem,” but there is and was no such a separate entity of “East Jerusalem.”
They put the housing phase announcement as “a direct challenge to the peace process advocated by Washington.” That wording continues the erroneous notion that the U.S. has a right to dictate to foreign countries and the wisdom to do so sensibly. The reporters call U.S. efforts to reduce Israel to indefensible borders, while the U.S. allow the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) to indoctrinate in hatred and terrorism, and while the U.S. training the P.A. military a “peace process.” That terminology is propagandistic. Just because that is what the U.S. calls it does not make it so.
When Bush was president, Democrats thought he brought the U.S. into conflict with other countries. What do they think now that the situation is getting worse?
Our perspective shows the U.S. scrapping all over. This rebuts the accusation by a former Presidential adviser that Israeli dislike for President Obama is racist. Their objections to his high-handed interference is the same all over the world.