President Obama’s International Relations — Are They Yielding Fruit?
EmailPresident Obama heads to New York City today for this week's convening of the United Nations General Assembly — a week packed with meetings of consequence, including a mini-summit with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority president Mahmoud Abbas; a meeting with Chinese President Hu Jintao; a speech to the general assembly; and the first ever time a President of the United States chairs a meeting of the UN Security Council.
As he prepares for the week, the President greets a world in which the report by Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal is splashed upon the front pages of the Washington Post.
It's a report that pulls no punches.
"Failure to gain the initiative and reverse insurgent momentum in the near-term (next 12 months) — while Afghan security capacity matures — risks an outcome where defeating the insurgency is no longer possible," he writes. "(I)nadequate resources will likely result in failure. However, without a new strategy, the mission should not be resourced."
What's the president's take? He described himself as "skeptical."
Yesterday he told George Stephanopoulos, "I am now going to take all this information and we're going to test whatever resources we have against our strategy, which is if by sending young men and women into harm's way, we are defeating al Qaeda and — and that can be shown to a skeptical audience, namely me — somebody who is always asking hard questions about deploying troops, then we will do what's required to keep the American people safe.”
If President Obama ultimately opts to take McChrystal's recommendations, it appears as though he will largely do so with U.S. troops. (Though, perhaps looking to change that, he's hosting an event this week in New York with the leaders of the countries of nations who contribute the most troops and police forces to the effort in Afghanistan.)
Ally Canada is pulling all troops — even though Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper said last month that "there is no such thing as a threat to the security of the United States which is not a threat to the security of Canada."
I asked Harper, "If our national security interests are the same…should Canada not continue its obligation to fight in Afghanistan?"
Said Harper: "We have now been there – let see that makes eight years. We have resolution for our parliament. We require that military deployments in Canada be supported by the parliament of Canada. Our government in – just in the last parliament – had that mission extended to 2011. That will mean we will have been there a decade….we have to – we have to have the support of parliament and the Canadian people and that support has been given until 2011. After that, we will be supportive in ways that we can be supportive. I am committed to operating within our parliamentary resolution."
As Peter Baker noted in the New York Times yesterday,"European allies still refuse to send significantly more troops to Afghanistan. The Saudis basically ignored Mr. Obama’s request for concessions to Israel, while Israel rebuffed his demand to stop settlement expansion. North Korea defied him by testing a nuclear weapon. Japan elected a party less friendly to the United States. Cuba has done little to liberalize in response to modest relaxation of sanctions. India and China are resisting a climate change deal. And Russia rejected new sanctions against Iran’s nuclear program even as Mr. Obama heads into talks with Tehran."
In July President Obama suggested that his efforts at international relations were beginning to bring about some modest achievements in terms of North Korea and Iran.
We asked: "Can you point to any reason why you're encouraged why your approach to Iran and North Korea is the right approach? And ultimately will be successful in reducing the threat in those nations?"
Said the president: "Well in North Korea, what we saw was a very strong unanimity around a very strong sanctions resumed that I think it's fair to say that even two or three years ago might not have been imposed by either Russia or China. They might have blocked it in the Security Council. …On Iran, I think that the governing elites there are going through a struggle that has been mirrored painfully and powerfully on the streets and in my mind the fact that we have both said we are willing to work with Iran at the same time as we have been very clear about our grave deep concerns with respect to not just the violence, not just the detentions that have taken place, has created a space where the international community can potentially join and pressure Iran more effectively than they have in the past."
- jpt
Can Mitt Romney Win Conservatives Back? 
Possible Contraception Compromise in D.C.
Why yes, they are yielding a bumper crop!……for enemies of freedom: Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela, Libya, Myanmar, etc.
Posted by: Appeasement Czar | September 21, 2009, 9:25 am 9:25 am
I don’t know, but killing them over the years has yielded an abundance of bad fruit.
Posted by: Huh | September 21, 2009, 9:47 am 9:47 am
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows that 30% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-eight percent (38%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -8.
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | September 21, 2009, 9:48 am 9:48 am
There ias absolutely zero evidence that anything we’ve done internationally is “yielding fruit”. Afghanistan = worse than Bush. N Korea = Still making nukes. Iran = Still making nukes and happy no missile defense. Iraq = Dragging our feet for withdrawal (16 month speech). Russia = Happy no missile defense and Czech and Poland upset (1 for 2). Mid-East Peace = Nothing new at all. Maybe I am wrong, but I haven’t seen any evidence to refute these facts.
Posted by: lfrichar | September 21, 2009, 9:51 am 9:51 am
What will Obama do when he comes face to face with his new best friends Qadhafi, Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Medvedev?
Bow, hug, fist bump, dopey grin?
Sure Obama will talk tough–but no one appears to be intimidated at all.
He already has the reputation of being a pushover.
Can’t even control the Democrats.
Posted by: jack | September 21, 2009, 9:53 am 9:53 am
Sure, empowering the U.N. at the expense of American Sovereignty.Seven former heads of CIA worried about the Obama-Justice Dept weakening our ability tom protect ourselves. Campaigning on focusing on Afghanistan and now apparently about to ignore his Generals request for more troops or risk failure? Antagonistic, and downright dismissive toward allies in Eastern Europe and having Israel worry it is facing for the first time a hostile & naive administration in Washington. Carter was inept and dysfunctional. Obama’s appointees, political allies, and policies are life-threatening to Israel. Columbia, an ally and trading partner has witnessed this administration placing the wishes of organized labor ahead of U.S. interests. Our largest creditor, is worried about a trade war and monetary trickery to re-pay the with devalued dollars.Other than that, the bar scene from Star wars is about to hail our new President with Rose pedals.
Posted by: pauldia | September 21, 2009, 9:53 am 9:53 am
Obama is making history again at the United Nations…blah blah blah
And by going on Letterman.
And by doing five Sunday shows.
It’s all about Obama and his legacy.
He’s addicted to the spotlight.
Posted by: millie | September 21, 2009, 9:56 am 9:56 am
“Obama is making history again at the United Nations…blah blah blah
“And by going on Letterman.
And by doing five Sunday shows.”
Don’t forget he “might” show up in Copenhagen if Chicago is a shoe-in for the Olympics to bask in the glow of double “O”.
Posted by: Eg"O"tastic | September 21, 2009, 10:23 am 10:23 am
Yielding fruit?
Not even low hanging or windfall fruit – fruit that’s already on the ground.
Posted by: WWTP? | September 21, 2009, 10:31 am 10:31 am
Maybe Obama will seek allies in his efforts to overthrow the democracy in Honduras and return the Communist to power.
Posted by: drjohn | September 21, 2009, 10:58 am 10:58 am
Maybe…..maybe not.
Obviously, our relations with Poland and CZ Republic, have suffered this past week.
I have seen little progress with “problem” countries, and only modest warm-ups from more neutral states.
Right now, I would have to call it a grade of C, at best.
Posted by: Rick McDaniel | September 21, 2009, 11:01 am 11:01 am
From the Guardian:
“The review is due to be completed by the end of this year, and European officials say the outcome is not yet clear. But one official said: “Obama is now driving this process. He is saying these are the president’s weapons, and he wants to look again at the doctrine and their role.”
Our nukes are OBAMA’s! He owns them now!
Not us!
Posted by: drjohn | September 21, 2009, 11:27 am 11:27 am
Of course it’s yeilding fruit – big, rotten, wormy fruit that’ll come back to damage the USSA for decades.
When you’re making the likes of Putin, Chavez and Mahmoud Abbas happy, then you KNOW you’re doing something very, very wrong.
What can you say, the emperor has no clothes – he’s a rabid socialist.
Posted by: PatF | September 21, 2009, 11:28 am 11:28 am
One wonders how long it will be before Obama proposes that the US be governed by a consortium made up of China, Russia and Venezuela.
Posted by: drjohn | September 21, 2009, 11:57 am 11:57 am
It is about time that an administration looks closely – not blindly – at our foreign policy. War is never the best solution unless there is no other ulternative – you also must have clear objectives and an exit strategy. I don’t believe any of those things applied in Iraq. Sadam was a madman but he did all his killing years before we arrived on the scene. And, when this genocide was going on – we did nothing to get involved. And I also believe strongly, that if we had never fought the Gulf war we would never have been attacked on 9/11. Obama is doing the absolute right thing when it comes to foreign policy. Talking to the enemy is not weakness it is a show of real strength, confidence and determination. I support him all the way.
Posted by: Gretchenmom | September 21, 2009, 12:16 pm 12:16 pm
“Obama is doing the absolute right thing…” “I support him all the way.”
Time will tell. Unfortunately, we have the Jimmy Carter prism through which to view this tact. It didn’t turn out so well.
Posted by: Leah | September 21, 2009, 12:58 pm 12:58 pm
“How could Obama choose such a day?”
That was the anguished outburst of a senior Polish officer responding to Obama’s fruit yielding international relations.
Posted by: Echo chamber | September 21, 2009, 1:15 pm 1:15 pm
This administration’s policy toward a tiny, democratic ally–Honduras–is disgaceful and indefensible.
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | September 21, 2009, 1:25 pm 1:25 pm
One wonders how long it will be before Obama proposes that the US be governed by a consortium made up of China, Russia and Venezuela.
Posted by: drjohn
One wonders how long it will be before the hysterical ‘right’ starts making deals with terrorists to attack america, so they can try to blame the dems
Posted by: ? | September 21, 2009, 1:39 pm 1:39 pm
we have the Jimmy Carter prism through which to view this tact. It didn’t turn out so well.
Posted by: Leah
lets see….. Reagan armed Saddam…with weapons that were used against americans in the gulf war
Bush never had a plan for afghanistan..or Iraq…
guess those ‘didn’t turn out so well’ either…
too bad you folks weren’t so vocal when you boys were destroying the world
Posted by: ? | September 21, 2009, 1:45 pm 1:45 pm
we have the Jimmy Carter prism through which to view this tact. It didn’t turn out so well.
Posted by: Leah
too bad you folks weren’t so vocal when you boys were destroying the world
Posted by: ?
The world’s destroyed? Who’s hysterical now?
Who says no one spoke up against past presidents? Until nine months ago, dissent was patriotic.
Posted by: Ruh oh... | September 21, 2009, 1:54 pm 1:54 pm
Speaking of Obama and the Democrats selling out freedom around the world…..
—After Senator Jim Webb met with the imprisoned leader of Burma’s democracy movement, Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi last month, he surprised Burma-watchers around the world when he declared that Suu Kyi was on board with his PLAN TO CODDLE BURMA’S REPRESSIVE REGIME BY DROPPING U.S. SANCTIONS. It was Webb’s “clear impression from [Suu Kyi] that she is not opposed to lifting some sanctions,” he said at a press conference. Such a sentiment would have marked a major shift for Suu Kyi and Webb’s comments rattled her supporters.
Nyan Win, Suu Kyi’s lawyer and one of only two people allowed access to Suu Kyi under the terms of her house arrest, was asked to clarify whether this was, in fact, Suu Kyi’s new position. According to Nyan Win, Suu Kyi “REPLIED THAT SHE HAD NOT DISCUSSED THE ISSUE [SANCTIONS] WITH ANYONE RECENTLY.”—
Posted by: Appeasement Czar | September 21, 2009, 1:58 pm 1:58 pm
The world’s destroyed? Who’s hysterical now? Posted by: Ruh oh…
what’s the matter, .. now you guys are upset and gettin’ bent out of shape by people saying outrageous things, tsk tsk… can’t even have any fun anymore…
republicans have such thin skins….
Posted by: ? | September 21, 2009, 2:25 pm 2:25 pm
-Until nine months ago, dissent was patriotic.-
And Brooks Brothers was the brand to wear. Now what? I wear Zegna suits myself, but what about those that prefer a more traditional cut?
Posted by: French Cuffs | September 21, 2009, 2:28 pm 2:28 pm
meanwhile back at the ranch:
Republicans, they certainly have a way with repressive tendencies…and such a way with words… wonder if he had a ‘wide stance’ while he was speaking
“Sen. Tom Coburn’s (R-OK) chief of staff Michael Schwartz made the case against pornography. “All pornography is homosexual pornography,” said Schwartz, quoting an ex-gay friend of his, “because all pornography turns your sexual drive inwards.”
Schwartz then explained the side benefit of this finding — that if boys know pornography will make them gay, they’ll never touch it,…
Posted by: ? | September 21, 2009, 2:32 pm 2:32 pm
One wonders how long it will be before the hysterical ‘right’ starts making deals with terrorists to attack america, so they can try to blame the dems
Posted by: ? | Sep 21, 2009 1:39:32 PM
Ryan C I almost didn’t recognize you.
Posted by: 'Un-Amercian' | September 21, 2009, 2:37 pm 2:37 pm
Until nine months ago, dissent was patriotic.
Posted by: Ruh oh
yeah, back in those days no one brought guns to show how ‘patriotic’ they were…..
back further.. you were accused of treason for being against Bush’s policies….and the Bushies would come after you… just ask the Dixie Chicks, or Joe Wilson ( the 1st one) about freedom of speech…
……. where’s my ‘freedom fries’
Posted by: ? | September 21, 2009, 2:37 pm 2:37 pm
just ask the Dixie Chicks
They in jail?
Posted by: LP | September 21, 2009, 3:15 pm 3:15 pm
he is veering left on every single foreign policy issue extant. There is no overarching strategy to any of this, but rather the instinctive leftist desire to be “antiestablishment”. He is a fool, a liar, and a knave. He will repeat the mistakes of Ford and Carter. LUN.
Posted by: matt | September 21, 2009, 3:43 pm 3:43 pm
“just ask the Dixie Chicks, or Joe Wilson (the 1st one) about freedom of speech”
Posted by: ? | Sep 21, 2009 2:37:12 PM
The Dixie Chicks and “Country Club” Joe Wilson both became huge celebrities and made lots of money from their persecution–Chicks from additional music sales and Wilson from books. They did not suffer, they prospered because of their statements.
Posted by: Libs, and the Lying Liars Who Elect Them | September 21, 2009, 3:50 pm 3:50 pm
Chicks from additional music sales
Libs, and the Lying Liars Who Elect Them
if you take the time to check it out you’ll find you’re wrong but that’s what Republicans do, make it up as they go along and proclaim everything they say as the ‘gospel’…
can I see your birth certificate…..
even have to rip off some of franken’s book title, do you guys ever do anything original besides bringing america to it’s knees..?
guess not….. mission accomplished
Posted by: ? | September 21, 2009, 4:17 pm 4:17 pm
“”"”"Reagan armed Saddam…with weapons that were used against americans in the gulf war”"”"”"
Posted by: ?
I was in both Gulf wars and we didn’t sell Kalishnakoff’s, T-72′s and Migs to Saddam. But, if it fits your agenda, it must be true. You also say we lost in Afghanistan and Iraq? I would say the jury is still out on Iraq (unless you have a crystal ball) and unless Obama gives our Gneneral’s the resources, Afghanistan is 50/50.
Posted by: lfrichar | September 21, 2009, 4:18 pm 4:18 pm
“Country Club” Joe Wilson both became huge celebrities
Posted by: Libs, and the Lying Liars Who Elect Them
‘instersing’ that you didn’t say he was wrong… very revealing…. as since he was accurate in his findings, what else could a ‘rightist’ say but more made up nonsense and character attacks…
Posted by: ? | September 21, 2009, 4:20 pm 4:20 pm
2008:
Dissent is the Highest Form of Patriotism.
2009:
Dissent is the Highest Form of Racism.
Posted by: New World Order | September 21, 2009, 4:46 pm 4:46 pm
Hey, War is Over if Barry wants it.
Posted by: Obamatopia | September 21, 2009, 4:48 pm 4:48 pm
“One wonders how long it will be before the hysterical ‘right’ starts making deals with terrorists to attack america, so they can try to blame the dems”
Posted by: ? | Sep 21, 2009 1:39:32 PM
Do you mean like at the height of the Cold War, when Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) offered to assist Soviet leaders in formulating a public relations strategy to counter President Reagan’s foreign policy and to complicate his re-election efforts.
The letter, dated May 14, 1983, was sent from the head of the KGB to Yuri Andropov, who was then General Secretary of the Soviet Union’s Communist Party.
In his letter, KGB head Viktor Chebrikov offered Andropov his interpretation of Kennedy’s offer.
Former U.S. Sen. John Tunney (D-Calif.) had traveled to Moscow on behalf of Kennedy to seek out a partnership with Andropov and other Soviet officials.
Oops, looks like the Dems own that strategy, ? or Ryan.
Posted by: KennedyCare | September 21, 2009, 4:54 pm 4:54 pm
The Castro brothers, Daniel Ortega and Hugo Chavez are all happy, so it looks like the rotten apple gang is firmly behind Obama’s policies.
Posted by: E Go | September 21, 2009, 5:29 pm 5:29 pm
Dissent is the Highest Form of Racism.
Posted by: New World Order
if the shoe fits (for the crazy right)… wear it.. don’t be ashamed of who you are or what you really represent…
Posted by: ? | September 21, 2009, 6:07 pm 6:07 pm
Do you mean
Posted by: KennedyCare
No, I mean like Ronnie Ray Gun and Saddam…
how’r all them Contras……. you betcha
1st Ollie & his band then …..Blackwater
Posted by: ? | September 21, 2009, 6:09 pm 6:09 pm
Do you mean like at the height of the Cold War
Posted by: KennedyCare
nah….. I mean like the crazy Birchers ( hey rhymes with Birthers) calling Eisenhower a communist……..imagine a few years before he was supreme allied commander WW2, comes back to the US, gets elected Pres, and becomes a communist….. go figure
Posted by: ? | September 21, 2009, 6:12 pm 6:12 pm
Ummm, it depends. I suppose if you are Castro, Chavez, Putin, etc. then the Weiner in Chief is doing a great job for you all. If you are an American, then, well, not so much….
Posted by: TxBoB | September 21, 2009, 6:15 pm 6:15 pm
If you are an American, then, well, not so much….
Posted by: TxBoB
but everyone ‘knows’, that ‘real’ americans. like the ones Palin and the rest of the repubs aimlessly reference live in the selected ‘real america’.. so, that small cult of americans might agree with you, assuming you are the proper color and religion
Posted by: ? | September 21, 2009, 6:20 pm 6:20 pm
It began as an operation to improve U.S.-Iranian relations, wherein Israel would ship weapons to a relatively moderate, politically influential group of Iranians; the U.S. would then resupply Israel and receive the Israeli payment.
The Iranian recipients promised to do everything in their power to achieve the release of six U.S. hostages, who were being held by the Lebanese Shia Islamist group Hezbollah, who were unknowingly connected to the Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution.
The plan eventually deteriorated into an arms-for-hostages scheme, in which members of the executive branch sold weapons to Iran in exchange for the release of the American hostages Large modifications to the plan were devised by Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North of the National Security Council in late 1985,..
in which a portion of the proceeds from the weapon sales was diverted to fund anti-Sandinista and anti-communist rebels, or Contras, in Nicaragua.
President Ronald Reagan was a supporter of the Contra cause,..The investigation was compounded when large volumes of documents relating to the scandal were destroyed or withheld from investigators by Reagan administration officials.
in the end, fourteen administration officials were charged with crimes, and eleven convicted, including then-Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger.
They were all pardoned in the final days of the George H. W. Bush presidency, who had been vice-president at the time of the affair.
Posted by: ? | September 21, 2009, 6:26 pm 6:26 pm
…. oh those Bush’s… they just seem to show up everywhere………
As a director of a failing thrift, Bush voted to approve $100 million in what were ultimately bad loans to two of his business partners. And in voting for the loans, ..
he failed to inform fellow board members at Silverado Savings & Loan that the loan applicants were his business partners.
Neil Bush paid a $50,000 fine and was banned from banking activities for his role in taking down Silverado,..
which cost taxpayers $1.3 billion. A Resolution Trust Corporation Suit against Bush and other officers of Silverado was settled in 1991 for $26.5 million.
Posted by: ? | September 21, 2009, 6:36 pm 6:36 pm
“eleven convicted, including then-Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger. ”
A bald-faced, categorical lie. Weinberger was never tried for, nor convicted of, anything whatsoever.
How typical of a leftist to smear a dead man.
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | September 21, 2009, 8:31 pm 8:31 pm
“yeah, back in those days no one brought guns to show how ‘patriotic’ they were…..”
I guess this goofball is referring to the black dude who showed up armed at a townhall meeting.
As for the Birchers, Wm. F. Buckley saw to it that they were anathema in the conservative movement. Utter crazies, much like SDS, the Weather Underground and the Black Panthers, except they never bombed any buildings or killed anybody.
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | September 21, 2009, 8:41 pm 8:41 pm
“…those Bush’s… they just seem to show up everywhere……”
Kind of reminds you of Billy Carter, doesn’t it? Or Hugh Rodham. (Which was the Rodham brother who got his buddy a pardon?) Or the accused rapist William Kennedy Ith? Or the Kennedy cousin who murdered that young girl in Connecticut.
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | September 21, 2009, 8:48 pm 8:48 pm
*William Kennedy Smith*
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | September 21, 2009, 8:49 pm 8:49 pm
Skakel. That was the murderous Kennedy cousin’s name. Then there was the one who OD’d on drugs, and there was young Joe trying to get his Cathlic marriage anulled after seven years.
Skakel. How proud of him they must all be.
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | September 21, 2009, 9:09 pm 9:09 pm
“They were all pardoned in the final days of the Geo[eleven] rge H. W. Bush presidency…”
Rank falsehood. Six pardons were granted.
The lesson? Left-wingers lie.
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | September 21, 2009, 9:38 pm 9:38 pm
The president’s foreign policy
strategy also known as Blah,Blah,Blah
has yielded some results! All Negative.
Iran and North Korea continue their
push towards nuclear weapons unabated!
Russia continues its intimidation of
Georgia, Ukraine etc.
Hugo Chavez of Venezuela continues to
consolidate his power and has
threatened to start a nuclear weapons
program.
Yielding Fruit? Rotten Tomatoes!
Posted by: reaganfan | September 21, 2009, 10:04 pm 10:04 pm
“Russia’s top general said on Monday that plans to deploy missiles in an enclave next to Poland had not been shelved, despite a decision by the United States to rethink plans for missile defense in Europe.”
Great. Get the idea that Obama knows nothing about either diplomacy or negotiation?
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | September 21, 2009, 10:09 pm 10:09 pm
Great. Get the idea that Obama knows nothing about either diplomacy or negotiation?
Posted by: Fascist Hyena
so, what’s the big deal about russia
Posted by: ? | September 22, 2009, 1:03 am 1:03 am
I am very upset about the policy against the Honduras! They take a hands off approach toward middle east countries but completely disrespect the Honduras constitution. This is something we should not allow Clinton or obama to do.
Posted by: Jenny | September 22, 2009, 8:12 am 8:12 am
Obama = Epic Failure
Posted by: tjp612 | September 22, 2009, 4:33 pm 4:33 pm