Feeble foreign policy emboldens our adversaries

When word came that the Russian government had granted former NSA contractor and fugitive NSA leaker Edward Snowden asylum, the consequences of President Obama’s enfeebled foreign policy directives became abundantly clear. President Obama’s almost obsessive desire to eschew any semblance of a muscular foreign policy has weakened the administration’s ability to protect America’s vital national interests and rendered Russian dismissal of American concerns a fait accompli.

The manner in which Russia continued to brush off U.S. requests for Snowden’s extradition should have come as no surprise given Mr. Obama’s penchant for dithering and equivocation. President Obama’s approach to foreign policy has systematically undercut the international respect that is necessary to achieve a nation’s foreign policy objectives.

This process began almost immediately following the president’s inauguration in 2009. While then-U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was making a conciliatory offer to “reset” relations with Russia, the Obama administration was simultaneously preparing to rescind a series of strategically important agreements negotiated by the Bush administration, with great difficulty, to place vital missile defense assets in Poland and the Czech Republic.

Anti-ballistic missile (ABM) and radar tracking assets would have been added to the larger NATO-led European missile defense enterprise, providing significant long-term protections for both the American homeland and forward deployed troops from intermediate and long-range missile threats originating in Iran.

Russia objected to the anti-ballistic missile and radar emplacements, which they saw as threatening their perceived sphere of influence. Thanks to the Obama administration, Russia got what it wanted: The missile defense plans were nixed during the president’s first year in office.

This decision was followed up by the president himself subtly offering then-Russian President Dmitry Medvedev “flexibility” on missile defense issues after his November 2012 reelection. Medvedev responded by telling Obama that he would “transmit this information to Vladimir.”

The information transmitted was indeed clear: Repeated acts of weakness and acquiescence to Russian demands informed the Russian government that there existed no compelling need to accede to American interests because the likelihood of any repercussions for their intransigence was remote.

But President Obama’s misguided foreign policy decisions have not been limited to his dealings with Russia. The administration’s impotent response to ongoing cyber indiscretions by the Chinese government has all but emboldened Asia’s emerging superpower.

Strong evidence continues to link the Chinese government to repeated transgressions, including the stealing of American intellectual property and military intelligence. This theft has been ongoing for years, and the ineffectual response from the Obama administration, limited to the occasional verbal reprimand, has done little to curb China’s behavior.

The Obama administration’s preferred foreign policy approach, light rhetorical posturing designed to dispel any perception of international bullying, has achieved little if not the growing belief that the United States can be ignored.

The weakening of America’s global image has not simply emboldened our adversaries but also caused our most important allies to question our fidelity to the causes our nation has historically promoted.

The unassertive response to the conflagrations in Libya and Syria has sown confusion among allies and enemies alike as to where America stands and the extent to which she will defend both her ideals and those who promote them.

There was a time in the not-too-distant past when global adversaries would heed the words of an American president as they carried with them the implied weight of a full and vigorous American response. This respect was developed over the course of two World Wars and several generations. Sadly, it has now largely been squandered in the matter of one presidency.

Scott G. Erickson is a conservative writer, policy analyst, and law enforcement professional in California. He was recently named to the Republican National Committee’s “Rising Stars” program.

More in Opinion

Editorial cartoons for Wednesday, Nov. 21

A sketchy look at the day in politics.… Continue reading

Editorial: State’s VW windfall should electrify transportation

With nearly $113 million from the settlement, the state plans to switch buses and more to electric.

Parker: The press secretary as scolding Sunday school teacher

Sarah Huckabee Sanders’ humiliation of the media is a booster shot of ‘fake news’ animus for the base.

Milbank: Trump will do down in history — for his histrionics

A website search finds that Trump and his team have declared their actions historic some 400 times.

Ignatius: For a man ‘on his way out,’ Tillerson still at table

The secretary of state seems out of sync with Trump, but often it’s Trump who comes to his position.

GOP tax bill serves special interests over families

Last month Congress passed a budget that makes $4 trillion in cuts… Continue reading

Examples of ‘voter fraud’ didn’t involve voting

The Nov 11 letter to the editor captioned “Evidence of vopter fraud… Continue reading

Why was judge given lighter sentence for DUI?

This is in response to the Nov. 2 Herald article, “Judge gets… Continue reading

Herald’s story selection favors the left

Hello again. This time I want to remind you of your consistent… Continue reading

Most Read