A day late and a dollar short

Washington, D.C -- President Obama nailed a strange device to his mast and called it foreign policy and governed accordingly since he took office four years and five months ago.

What is this strange device and how does it work? For openers, it installs the old “a day late and a dollar short” saw as his administration’s operating principle in dealing with external problems. Second, it marks the point of departure for American statecraft best suited to a world as he would have it. The device’s third command tells him to yield the right of way to Vladimir Putin whenever the Russian president wants it. This is allegory. But I got wind of what lay ahead right after then-Sen. Obama beat Sen. John McCain, Republican, in the 2008 presidential elections.

---

Expect an “imaginative” foreign policy, a distinguished academic told me with a discreet glint in his eye. The scholar knows his ground well. He has served Democratic and Republican administrations for years as a trusted outside analyst. “Imaginative” is not exactly a confidence-inspiring label when attached to foreign or any other high level policy. In Mr. Obama’s case it was a clear signal of difficulties ahead with friendly and hostile governments alike. Hillary Clinton pointed out this hazard in her own way toward the end of her contest with Mr. Obama for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination. Drawing on a comparison of her Democrat rival and John McCain, the already affirmed Republican nominee, this is what the former First Lady and two term-senator had to say: “Sen. McCain brings 30 years of service on congressional foreign relations, defence and national security affairs committees to the table” and “Sen. Obama brings one foreign policy speech he made in Chicago two years ago.”
 Did Hillary make a point? Silly question. The fact that she subsequently served as Secretary of State in his administration does not diminish the validity of her judgment. She read candidate Obama well and saw him as supremely confident in his convictions; one of them being that America must reduce its foot print in the world and yet another that he had zero qualifications as a foreign policy leader. Syria is today’s blazing example of Mr. Obama’s deficit in foreign affairs. If she was right, he could not stop Syria’s civil war now if he tried to and when he could have done so when the conflict was small he didn’t try. He washed his hands. Mind you, he says he is willing to try it now--but only by restricting military help to selective opponents of Syria’s dictator, Bashir Assad, and giving them only small arms and canteen goods. Is that how he sees a military balance between Mr. Assad’s forces deploying tanks, artillery and attack fighter planes and loose mobs sporting weapons waiting on the shelves in any odd local gun shop in America? Does he see the toys he is willing to supply leading Mr. Assad to serious negotiations? Published reports say Commander-in-Chief Obama ordered the Pentagon in early May to start laying the ground for the mini-action. A minor detail strikes me here as revealing: Mr. Obama decided to get involved but left the announcement of the unexpected news to a National Security official. Not very leader-like. Might this be his hand wash basin, just in case? There’s foresight for you. Three cheers for the strange device on the Commander’s-in-Chief mast. Mr. Putin, an old had at intelligence evaluation, must be amused if he can be bothered by the “imaginative” kidstuff from the White House. The Russian leader plays hard. Moscow leaves to doubt that Russia intends to keep Mr. Assad in Damascus. It has given him military supplies galore and full political and diplomatic backing. It may be willing to accept some deal between the warring factions but, I’m convinced, only on Mr. Putin’s terms. And he showed his mettle at the floating and rotating annual G-Eight summit of leading industrial powers with Syria and Mr. Obama’s toe dip in Syrian waters. The American president insisted on having the Syria war and Mr. Assad’s reach for Sarin, a nasty lethal gas to kill insurgents, civilians and children. Eliminating fighting men, it seems, would hardly be reason enough to cross Mr. Obama’s “red line” that Mr. Obama solemnly threatened not long ago, his intervention in the conflict on the insurgents’ side. Red lines? What are they? How good is Mr. Obama’s word? At the G-8, Mr. Putin tested what’s what. For his part, Mr. Obama and the other national leaders insisted on including the Syrian outrages in the G-8’s final communiqué. Mr. Putin said “nyet”--and he meant it. Sarin, he countered, is not a proven allegation and he would block their inclusion in the final communique. Mr. Obama worked on the Russian leaders for six hours in an extraordinarily long bilateral meeting. Vladimir Putin would not be moved and, guess what? Mr. Obama folded. There goes resolute Obama leadership. In return for submission to his iron will, Mr. Putin gave Mr. Obama a conference in Switzerland. Moscow will help to settle the Syria problem. Sure, Russia is willing to weaken its hold on Syria. Is there a buyer anywhere for the Brooklyn Bridge? How fares Mr. Obama’s strange device and what was the G-8 in Northern Ireland? The answer to the strange device I’d bet Mr. Putin would love to get as a toy. And the G-8? Maybe one Giant and Seven Dwarfs.