How to Lose Friends and Influence No One – Obama’s Failing Syrian Doctrine

When President Obama spoke to the American people on September 10, 2014, the people of Syria listened.   They heard a message they had prayed would be spoken for three years.  They heard the leader of the free world tell his nation that the time to act against terror in Iraq and also in Syria had come and that America, alongside Arab allies, was ready.

The message was not precisely what the people of Syria had hoped it would be, but it was enough to restore hope. To moderate Syrians, the regime of Bashar al Assad is the primary enemy and ISIS the secondary.  They understood, however, that the United States was focused on ISIS and they accepted this political reality. They also understood that we needed them fighting on the ground, and they agreed.

The War of Words That We Must Win

The U.S. and coalition’s assault on ISIS in Iraq and Syria will not be successful without the proverbial “boots on the ground” – but the fighters wearing those boots do not have to be, and cannot be, American troops.

In Iraq, we wage an aerial war against ISIS with the assistance of both the legitimate government of Iraq and the Kurdish army.  They are our boots and will be effective.

In Syria, however, we do not have a legitimate government to aid us. Syrian president Assad is a ruthless dictator who has killed over 190,000 of his own citizens in a war he is waging against his people. We are therefore relying on the Free Syrian Army – a force made up of civilians who organized not to fight ISIS but to fight for the end of the Assad regime.

On a Personal Note… Turkey, Muslims and my Friends

A gentleman whom I greatly respect recently asked me what percentage of Turkey I thought was Muslim. I told him I suspected it to be around 98%.  “Exactly,” he exclaimed adding, “ It’s a very dangerous place.”   

(The actual percentage of Turks claiming the Muslim religion is 99.8%.)

I write this post to simply express my opinion that the “danger” of a people, any people, cannot be determined by the faith they proclaim and that it is short-sighted for us to fall victim to the temptation of cultural generalization - especially when we are fighting a real enemy.

The Price of Isolationism – Pay for Weapons Now or Pay at the Pump Later

On Wednesday, the United States House of Representatives is expected to vote on whether or not to allow the Obama administration to arm and train the Free Syrian Army (FSA) which is fighting both the Islamic State (ISIS) and the tyrannical regime of Syria’s president Bashar al-Assad.
 

For more than two years President Obama hesitated in developing a strong policy to support the moderate fighters of Syria. Throughout that time only a handful of members of the House and Senate called for decisive action. Some members from both parties called repeatedly for action but their voices were ignored.

This inaction was due in part to the complexity of the situation on the ground in Syria and a fear of aiding radicalized elements of the revolution. It was primarily due though to an unwillingness to risk the ire of an American people weary of wars and rumors of wars.

ISIS, Syria and Bashar al-Assad – Who, What, When, Where and Why

As the president prepares to address the nation this evening regarding ISIS/Syria, it is worth taking a moment to reflect on how the Syrian crisis and later the ISIS crisis came to be.

In the spring of 2011, moderate students, small business owners, academics and others took the streets of Damascus, Syrian to protest the tyrannical reign of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad. This was part of the larger regional democratic push coined as the “Arab Spring.”  

These protestors were not jihadists. They were not radicals. They were fathers and mothers, husbands and wives who simply longed for the same values we cherish – freedom of assembly, free and fair elections and a fair and open judicial process among them. They also dared to seek rights we do not ever think to cherish such as the right to not be tortured by the intelligence service of your own government for verbalizing any criticism of the president or his policies.

The Challenge For Obama in His Wednesday Speech

President Obama stood before the people of Estonia on September 3^rd and gave a speech that resonated with all who cherish democracy and demand a world where the ideals of democracy are free to flourish.

He spoke with strength and deliberation. He spoke with passion of the past heroism of the Estonian people who stood proud in the face of tyranny on the heels of tyranny. He spoke resolutely of the solidarity of NATO, and specifically of the United States, with the Baltic States.  He spoke of a future that was secure and united, dedicated and determined. 

In short, the President of the United States spoke words befitting his title.

On Wednesday, September 10^th, the president will address the American people and present his strategy for defeating the self-proclaimed jihadist threat of ISIS/ISIL/IS. 

He proved in Estonia that he can eloquently weave the rational of history with the urgency of the moment into the fragile fabric of a clear and present danger.  On the eve of this speech, President Obama must ask himself two questions. First, how does he cut from that fabric a flag that rallies a nation weary of rallies?   Secondly, how does he persuade a nation that is justifiably distrustful of his resolve to carry that flag to victory?

It is my hope that he succeeds in both. I am not confident, but hopeful. 

Obama's Words Show Vision - Will Actions Follow The Same Path?

For all the criticisms of President Obama (mine included) regarding his lack of a decisive foreign policy, one cannot listen to or read his remarks to the people of Estonia without being reminiscent of President Ronald Reagan's 1987 speech to the people of Germany.  Whether his actions will follow the path of his rhetoric is still to be seen; however, his words showed that he has a vision focused squarely on the side of a strong United States that stands proudly for the values of democracy and civil society and is willing and able to use her strength to protect those values when threatened.

From his remarks:

"During the long Soviet occupation, the great Estonian poet, Marie Under, wrote a poem in which she cried to the world: “Who’ll come to help?  Right here, at present, now!”  And I say to the people of Estonia and the people of the Baltics, today we are bound by our treaty Alliance.  We have a solemn duty to each other.  Article 5 is crystal clear:  An attack on one is an attack on all.  So if, in such a moment, you ever ask again, “who will come to help,” you’ll know the answer -- the NATO Alliance, including the Armed Forces of the United States of America, “right here, [at] present, now!”  We’ll be here for Estonia.  We will be here for Latvia.  We will be here for Lithuania.  You lost your independence once before.  With NATO, you will never lose it again."

"Today, your example (Estonia) -- your victory -- gives hope to people all over the world.  Yes, there will be setbacks and there will be frustrations, and there will be moments of doubt and moments of despair.  The currents of history ebb and flow, but over time they flow toward freedom -- more people, in every corner of the Earth, standing up and reaching to claim those rights that are universal.  And that’s why, in the end, our ideals are stronger.  And that’s why, in the end, our ideals will win."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/09/03/remarks-president-obama-people-estonia

Blind GOP Isolationism Does Not Escape Blame

For anyone who follows me on Twitter (Dean_Rice) you know I've been very critical of President Obama's indecisive and in my opinion dreadful foreign policy ie Syria, Assad, ISIS, Ukraine and Russia.

The truth is though that the blind isolationist mindset of many Republicans in Congress is as much to blame for the current global security meltdown as is Obama. The "not our business" mentality has a very real cost.

We can't be the worlds policeman, that is true. However, hiding behind this slogan while our national security erodes just to get a few more votes is at best naive and at worst cynically calculating.