Bush, Obama And Teddy's Big Stick: Obama walks like Gary Cooper in High Noon
19 December 2013
By Amir Taheri
These days, a visitor to the United States would be
surprised by how little interest Americans show in
foreign policy. The botched attempt by President
Barack Obama to introduce a state-controlled health
insurance scheme is the talk of the town, along with a
persistently high unemployment rate. The mood is
somber, to say the least, and the traditional sense of
optimism is getting paler by the day.
Although Obama's original supporters now show buyer's
remorse, the Republicans seem unable to offer a
credible alternative.
America is having one of its isolationist fits, so it
was exciting to witness an event themed on American
foreign policy thousands of miles from Washington.
This was the 20th anniversary of the Baker Institute,
founded by former Secretary of State James Baker at
Rice University in Houston, Texas. The event was built
around a conversation with George W. Bush, who has
kept a low profile and declined to discuss in public
his successor's performance. "W," as his fellow Texans
like to call him, refused to be drawn into Obama-bashing,
something akin to a national sport in the US these
days.
"It is important to preserve the dignity of the
presidency," he insisted. Nevertheless, his response
to a series of questions by former ambassador Edward
Djerejian did show the contours of an alternative
strategy that Republicans might want to consider for
the 2016 presidential elections.
To be sure, W cannot enter that race. But there are
signs that he might not wish to stay on the sidelines
like he did in 2012.
Bush's analysis sounded very much Schmittian. Like the
late German philosopher Carl Schmitt, W believes that
the central issue of politics is the distinction
between friend and adversary. If politics is about
choice, it is inevitably about taking sides. There are
things you are determined to do and things you are
determined to prevent.
That approach was formulated in the much-denigrated
Bush Doctrine, the axis around which W built his
foreign policy.
According to that doctrine, the first task of foreign
policy is to protect the US against hostile action.
Those who threaten US security and/or national
interests will be identified, pursued and punished, no
matter how long it takes and how much it costs.
Duplicity will provide no protection for those who
claim to be friends and yet support enemies in
underhanded ways. Just as the US would always be there
for its friends when their national security and vital
interests are threatened, it expects its friends to
stand by it in similar circumstances.
However, the distinction between friend and enemy is
not a black-and-white one. Many nations and non-state
actors on the global stage form a large cluster of
grey. Some nations are friends and allies, and others
just allies and/or partners.
If a hierarchy of worth were to be established from
the US point of view, the 40 or so established
democracies could be regarded as the hardcore members
of the "Friends of America Club."
According to the Bush Doctrine, the bigger the number
of democracies, the safer the US will be. Thus,
helping spread democratic rule, in its different
forms, should be a top priority of American foreign
policy.
The aim is always to do whatever is possible to
transform an enemy into a friend. That happened in the
case of many nations since the Second World War, none
of which are now likely to pose a threat to the US.
America invested massive amounts of blood and treasure
to make sure that nations as far apart as Germany,
South Korea and Japan built new lives and kept
potential aggressors at bay. In a sense, standing by
Germany, Japan and South Korea was an investment in
America's national security.
Against that background, Bush is still "deeply
convinced" that the world is a better place without
the Taliban in Afghanistan and Saddam Hussein in Iraq.
Aside from existing hardcore allies, the US has many
partners and friends. Some are not on the same
wavelength as the United States on all issues. While
respecting diversity, the US should make efforts to
persuade them to carry out the political, social and
economic reforms it deems necessary for long-term
stability and prosperity.
As a presidential candidate in 2000, Bush had
reflected the isolationist mood of that time. The
events of 9/11 forced him to grow beyond that. As far
as foreign policy is concerned, realizing that America
cannot remain a superpower and expect to be left alone
by the enemies of the global system, he became an
activist president. W's critics have tried to portray
him as a caricature of Teddy Roosevelt in his
jingoistic garb. But there is a difference: Teddy
walked softly while carrying a big stick, with an
apologetic demeanor. In contrast, W used the big stick
whenever necessary and, even now, is not apologetic on
any aspect of his foreign policy. His undeclared motto
is: "Do things only when you believe in them; if you
don't, don't do them."
During his eight years as president, W devoted only a
few speeches to foreign policy. He would discuss
widely, think carefully, and then act. Much to the
chagrin of his detractors—and they are legion even
today—his motto was "Few words, more action."
The contrast with his successor is stark. Obama has
made countless policy speeches but has done little or
nothing to build a coherent global strategy.
Obama walks like Gary Cooper in High Noon, fixing
deadlines and red lines by which real or imagined
adversaries ought to do what he demands, but hides
Teddy's big stick under the table. When his deadlines
pass and his red lines are crossed, he makes another
speech. Not quite sure who he is, he is unable to
distinguish friend from enemy.
Amir Taheri was born in Ahvaz,
southwest Iran, and educated in Tehran, London and
Paris. He was Executive Editor-in-Chief of the daily
Kayhan in Iran (1972-79). In 1980-84, he was Middle
East Editor for the Sunday Times. In 1984-92, he
served as member of the Executive Board of the
International Press Institute (IPI). Between 1980 and
2004, he was a contributor to the International Herald
Tribune. He has written for the Wall Street Journal,
the New York Post, the New York Times, the London
Times, the French magazine Politique Internationale,
and the German weekly Focus. Between 1989 and 2005, he
was editorial writer for the German daily Die Welt.
Taheri has published 11 books, some of which have been
translated into 20 languages. He has been a columnist
for Asharq Alawsat since 1987. Taheri's latest book
"The Persian Night" is published by Encounter Books in
London and New York.
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add Comments