During the second Punic War the Roman General Fabius received the surname of "Cunctator" for reason of his gradual or cautious decision-making process and his reluctance to confront. The Russian General Kotouzov followed a related strategy against Napoleon during the war against Russia.
The American president is confronted with several flash points--the Middle East peace process, Syria, the Iranian and North Korean situations, inter alia--which remain unresolved, but for their continuous deterioration.
Some observers are perplexed by the American reluctance to get involved at close range. This is in stark contrast with the activism of previous administrations which were often too eager to occupy the stage with the dire consequences we know. True, John Kerry, the new Secretary of State, has lately given some signals which might indicate a bolder foreign policy. One might question nevertheless the value of endless talks with Iran, or more indirectly with North Korea, which allow those states to continue to develop their nuclear capacity under cover. It is true that diplomacy must address allies and foes alike, but there remains a difference in being open-minded for talks (under condition), and being complacent. Munich does not need to be repeated.
I do not understand the policies of the Obama administration, neither do I grasp former uncertain moves: the Quartet (remember?), the six parties talks, the UN special envoy for Syria, the endless repeat of the negotiations(?) with Iran. In those fora the Americans are often "low key" while the EU is usually on its existential irrelevant best, as Russia and China adhere to their poker face gambits.
One knows too little about the facts but be assured that symbols and gestures still count. The West is in need of American leadership, whether to adhere to, or correct if needed. The main difference today is that the United States is no longer able to get things done by itself. It needs to make variable clusters which can add credibility and added value to its intentions or suggestions. Western Europe is an ideological partner, no longer a strategic one in a mere subsidiary role. The Americans should interact more with the BRICS, who are for the time being steered by a Sino/Russian opportunistic partnership of sorts.
I doubt that one could find many countries which are happy with the wild fires consuming so many parts of the world. If the United States wants them to be "stockholders" in the policy they consider, they have to be consulted and be made part of the solution under consideration. Otherwise they risk aggravating the problem, as is the case now.
Diplomacy is the lender and guarantor of last resort. Besides, when one says that all options remain on the table, one also needs to be credible. A rhetorical stick will no longer do. Tehran and Pyongyang use talks and posture to cover up their nuclear Schadenfreude. Meanwhile Israel might have a lot to lose if the Palestinian problem gets stuck in the Arabian sands. Sometimes, as is the case in Syria, a direct intervention might boomerang. This does not equal "laissez faire,"
but should encourage diplomatic initiatives taken together with other interested parties which are equally worried but unevenly skilled in making diplomatic ouvertures or initiatives. Washington remains by far the only power which could advance such asymmetric models of resolution.
The former Secretary of State, Mrs. Clinton, pursued a high-octane visibility policy but the results
were meager. Her successor looks like a man who wants to confront situations mano a mano, but President Obama does not seem to want to veer from his more Delphic persona. This is worrisome
in this rudderless world, custom-made for a statesman with the (former?) charisma of Obama. His eloquent and daring speeches in Berlin or Cairo had no offspring. The man of hope became the man of drones. He has become far too aloof, which is all the more regrettable since he finds himself surrounded by situations which cry out for his indisputable talent and intellect. He favors chamber music over the symphonic, but what is needed right now is a major, multiple diplomatic bang. In doing so he could still muster support and convince both the skeptics and undecided at home and abroad. The latter do not want to give nuclear proliferation a free ride. The forgotten Saudi peace plan could still be a starting point for further concrete steps towards a two-state solution (in Israel's interest). A solution of the Syrian drama looks impossible as long as the current power structure remains off limits. Likewise Dayton involved Milosevic before he ended up in the Hague. Even the Talibans are no longer ignored by the Americans!
In fairness it has also to be admitted that the political polarization in the United States makes it more difficult to find time and space to address the many problems of a world in tatters. Soon the President will be a "lame duck," risking to run out of time to fulfill the promises he made. This would be too bad since there has seldom been a leader who could raise the almost Messianic expectations as Obama has done. On the day of her funeral the shadow of the Iron Lady looms large over her present peers who look suddenly smaller by comparison.
No comments:
Post a Comment