As of now, I am in control here, in the White House

Is Norway Running U.S. Foreign Policy?

How much has Obama’s Nobel Prize for Peace influenced his conduct of foreign policy? That’s what I was wondering as I prepared this piece for Politico, President Obama’s ‘surrealpolitik.’

The decision by the Norwegian Nobel Committee to hand Obama the prize was an attempt to make him live up to an award he didn’t deserve by adopting the panel’s naive philosophy of negotiation at all costs. Obama has lived up to expectations, placing faith in the goodwill of bad men who want to negotiate long enough to complete their evil designs.

It’s a callow approach that will do indelible harm to U.S. national security and cost many lives.

I hope you have a chance to take a look.

Keith

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on RedditShare on LinkedInEmail this to someone

56 Responses to Is Norway Running U.S. Foreign Policy?

  1. On some level, you are correct but I do not agree with you Keith.
    Obama has been more than happy to do dangerous and warlike things, as long as they are under the covers, blamable on others, or not likely to cause the liberal left to notice.

    Cases in point:
    Gitmo (it’s not his fault he can’t close it)

    Drones: no one sees them, knows where they will strike, or when they have struck and it reduces american soldiers casualties. And we are doing it over the borders of countries we are not at war with.

    Libya/Syria: Wait, Wait, Wait until others have intervened or chemical weapons have given the UN ok. Doesn’t matter that we are supported rebels who are aligned with Al Queda.

    Hacking/Spying: When it comes to looking into domestic communications, American citizens Obama is more than happy to do something as long as its secret. Who knows what else he is hiding.

    When it comes to Iran/Russia/NorthKorea/China or any other enemies though he believes he has the ability to change their minds by the amazingness of his wonderful smile and speech.

  2. Keith, Lets take a step back. Pres Obama ha adopted the same approach to foreign policy that he has to domestic policy. When it gets hard and he has to make a decision that may poll badly he back away and avoids. Allowing the chips to fall as they would with no influence or guidance. The reason Russia and China don’t do what he asks is because they don’t have to. he exerts no influence or leverage over them. What reaction do you think China would have if the US said as of next Monday we are going to limit Chinese nationals in our paid of education programmes to 500 per year. China would weigh that up and bend. The issue is that Obama has no idea how to persuade, cajole and force. Same deal when negotiating with the republicans. They don’t have to be ideologically aligned to do business, they just have to work at a deal. Same with Russia. Same with Iran, Same with Venezuela, Same with Syria. The job and I’m stressing the term job as it should be that. Is to get things done not take the course of action that aligns with another speech about hope and joy and waterfalls. The President should operate in real terms and that means at times he has to get tough. It’s now that the required characteristics of a President are obvious and more obvious is that President Obama is simply not qualified. I think he is well intentioned but utterly useless at leading, commanding, deciding, persuading and achieving. His preference for topics that poll well for him is testimony to his inability or unwillingness to address the tough issues. Russia and China think he is weak, and anyone who has spent even a small amount of time doing business outside of the US knows that weakness is not respected, it is preyed upon. To think that Obama is commander in chief of the US is staggering when you stop for a moment and think about it. He won a popularity contest not a leadership election and this is the result. I’d challenge President Obama to set up a hour of live tv and for real journalists to ask him the tough questions unscripted. See if the emperor has any clothes then? What did HE do the night of Bengazhi, what does he think the US should do in Asia, why so slow on Syria? etc etc It is time to call him for what he is, the weakest President the US has ever had by a country mile and the fact he still has 3 years left is dangerous.

    • Mike, we all know that these problems exist and how and why he is president. When the facts are presented as reasoned and well measured as you have outlined, it is frightening beyond reason. I would like to thank you for this post, but I am too scared.

      • Hello, NSA…..are you watching? Mike, couldn’t agree more. My thoughts are that Obama governs with a box of Crayolas. “Let’s see, i will draw my new line with ……hmmm…I think I choose purple”.

        • Yes class let’s all say Good Morning to all those hard working
          folks at NSA, IRS, DHS, CIA and all the alphabet people peeping and sneaking at us everyday. Howdo?

  3. I like this site and enjoy reading your posts very much, but I realize that my views on foreign policy are one thing i have in common with the libertarians whereas I think that you and some of the others here have concerns closer to the neocon point of view. Mine is not to be the world’s policeman, and in the final analysis we can’t be. It’s impossible and we are already sinking financially because of all the money we have been wasting in foreign adventures. Taking sides on Middle Eastern problems by siding with jihadist rebels has been a disaster for the US. They always turn on us and use the weapons we have given them back against us ourselves. This goes all the way back to the Russian-Afghanistan War when we armed the Mujahideen simply because Russia was our enemy. The only exception I make to Middle Eastern involvement is to remain faithful to our only ally and friend there, Israel. We are all conservatives, however, and I agree with you and Scottso and Mike D on the incompetence of Obama whose most pressing issue is his popularity and polling. This is madness to have someone like him in charge of American lives.

    • Julie B, agree with you all the way. I love Keiths site but I differ sometimes when it comes to foreign policy. And when it comes to the Snowden affair. But then, I love a good discussion too.

    • Julie, i understand your thoughts. making Israel the exception is a BIG exception, since most of the issues we have are in the middle east and our siding with Israel is obviously something our enemies use against us.

      While we can’t be the policeman to the world, the thought process then is…who will be?
      If it weren’t for the US, Taiwan would be invaded and part of China.

      I agree that we should remove ourselves from both Germany and South Korea. Neither wants us there, though the US bases in Germany certainly help us for refueling and as hospital bases.

      The rest of the free world unfortunately does not have the stomach or the morals to defend Taiwan or Israel.

      And when the US doesn’t step in, look what happens in the rest of the world. It’s a sad slope we are on.
      But we do it for Moral/ethical reasons some of the time. The rest is for military or trade.

        • I think no one can be policeman to the world, and as for North Korea, the US will do nothing about it. We are all so worried about them having nuclear capability while the people of North Korea are starving and living in gulags. Some say there is cannibalism there. The world is overpopulated and coming apart at the seams. As an American, I am all for building a missile defense system to protect ourselves but not for sending our young people out to die in the civil wars of other countries. I just read on another site that Obama is going to send soldiers to Egypt to help with mob control.

        • Sorry, but you can see I do take the libertarian point of view and have a big isolationist streak in me. With Israel it’s a matter of once you give your word and your friendship, you don’t renege on it. Maybe all that destabilization of Muslim countries helps Israel by weakening it’s enemies. I don’t know, but somehow I think Israel would be safer with power being in the hands of ‘strong men’ like Mubarak, Gaddafi, Saddam, and Assad instead of religious fanatics.

          • you are right that Israel is better off with their enemies being controlled by Strong Men instead of a crazy populistic regime like Iran or Hezbollah or the muslim brotherhood. At least you know that Strong Men regimes are all about them.

            The US issue is that we spread ourselves too thin, make too many promises and have too many ties with nations that won’t protect themselves or help us when needed.

            The Russians and Chinese fight us on every front assuming that if North Korea or Iran would ever attach the US they would never attack them.

            How short sighted.

  4. Barry accepted the prize because he is so naive and vain and because adulation is his love and life. He just couldn´t resist it. But I don´t think that it affects him in any other way than that he picks it up now and then and polishes the golden surface. He is also a weak coward ( agree with Scottso and MikeD ) who avoids responsibility and likes secrecy.

    • I agree. As a corollary, I think he may still think he is the world’s darling, despite Brandenburg Zwei. He may think he can just put out of hint of a direction to take on an issue and the other world leaders, trying to please him, will get to work on it. If that was ever true, which I doubt, it is not now.

      • Star,I don´t know what kind of a bubble he lives in but he should begin to doubt that he still is this mix of rockstar/saint/darling. The leaders of Russia and China certainly don´t respect him. He wants to be popular and adored but a leader needs to be respected.

  5. I think he would be doing the same things even if he did not get the prize. I truly believe that he thinks speeches and appeasement actually is considered a policy. Others have said it, he only gets involved if the political winds shift that way, and then blames it on someone else. I have no idea why the Nobel committee picked him for the peace prize, maybe they saw his weakness early on.

  6. There are so many strings and pulleys up Barry’s spineless back it’s hard
    to point to one person or thing makes him perform. Sometimes I think it’s all like a board game to him as he’s so far removed from reality like
    drones. Whether he would act differently if he saw the collateral damage
    up close who knows. He’s so far in over his head as far as foreign policy
    he seems to try for what will get him more fame and adoration. He’s shown America his disdain for the military removing hot meals and cuts in benefits. But he can’t seem to be more considerate of those who wish us dead. So I guess he’s trying to live down to the plastic Nobel Prize
    that came out of a box of nuts in Norway.

  7. ok, give someone something they don’t deserve then they will act as if they do? well, I got some words for that idea and they are NOT G rated.

  8. After reading your most interesting piece on Politico and the varied, but reasoned opinions of my fellow commenters, it seems we’re all showing symptions of the rashomon effect in describing MrO’s motivation and actions (or inactions).

    The truth could be just simply that the Nobel prize meant as little to him as winning the election to become the POTUS.

  9. Obama’s ratings in the Muslim world are lower than were Bush’s.
    Drone bombing run amok, the surge in Afghan, where Afghanis rank US occupation more objectionable than the Taliban, refusal to punish Israel for Gaza and settlement increase-you can’t fool most of the people most of the Imperial time.