We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Mr Obama’s not-so-deft foreign policy

Here is a nice little video, via the blog of Tom G. Palmer, singing the praises of free trade, ahead of the upcoming G-20 meeting in the US. Incidentally, the recent decision by The Community Organiser to slap tariffs on Chinese tyre imports – focusing particularly on China – looks to be especially dumb. Given that the Asian giant holds rather a lot of US debt, and has the ability to switch dollars for euros on a vast scale, making such a move seems almost reckless. About as clever as moving to switch off anti-missile defence over Poland on the 70th anniversary of Hitler’s invasion of Poland. In the latter case, the decision may have been right on specific military grounds, but the timing was dumb. Was not part of the appeal of the chap from Chicago that he did not make such errors?

We were promised that Mr Obama would be all smooth and charming to other countries, unlike the terribly vulgar Mr Bush with his Texan drawl (sarcasm alert). But I am not really sure that Mr Obama is not as capable of making an even more dangerous mistake: he pisses off really important, or potentially important, allies and large economies in a position to act. Annoying the French, as Mr Bush wonderfully did, is hardly a mistake, but hitting China with a very public act of protectionism, most decidedly is.

24 comments to Mr Obama’s not-so-deft foreign policy

  • I am gradually coming to the conclusion that it’s this incompetency that will ensure that the big O is by far not the worst thing that ever happened to the US, and that the worst is yet to come some time after his only term in office.

  • jdm

    I am gradually coming to the [incompetency] conclusion […]

    Hey, Alisa, c’mon in! The water’s fine!

    As Roger de Hauteville, one of the posters at Maggies Farm describes it, “It’s a straight spoils system, you deep-thinking knuckleheads.” (And, having been written in May of this year, I don’t think that Roger expected the new activism from the, er, non-left which is having a much greater effect than was expected. Nonetheless…).

    The Chinese get the shaft because they aren’t part of the New Spoils System (or paraphrasing Stalin, “These Chinese? How many votes can they deliver?”). I haven’t quite figured out the what’s up with the rest of the foreign policies. They seem all over the map (literally). They mess with Honduras and have no comment with Iran. The missile defense thing mentioned above…

    I do agree with your conclusions though. We’re gonna pay even though O is only gonna get one term to pig out on that sweet, sweet Other People’s Money. It will be interesting to see if he takes over as “history’s greatest monster” or he manages to avoid that title. Maybe The Won will get that title for the 21st century.

  • jdm

    … hmm, it seems as if I changed opinions in mid-stream. I have no excuse. I like the incompetency theory – I’m certainly not going to argue against it – but I also like the Tammany Hall theory as well.

  • RRS

    What evidence was there that O had any executive competency?

    There was plenty that he had experience with Chicago-style governance through “patronage” (which may be almost the same as spoils).

    Our foreign relations cannot be managed by patronage, or lack thereof (See, Honduras, by Clinton).

  • JDM:

    Look at Obama’s foreign policies as being the anti-Bush; that is, appealing to his base on the grounds that he’s doing things opposed to what Bush did.

    In Honduras, Zelaya was a Friend of Chavez, and Chavez was opposed by Bush. Indeed, before the abortive coup of 2002, Chavez’ increasing authoritarianism caused concern even on the left, but once Bush was perceived to be in favor of the coup, the left immediately became lapdogs for Chavez.

    We know about Bush’s views on nuclear Iran. And, it was Bush that tried to get the missile defense installations in the Czech Republic and Poland….

  • Michael Staab

    It may be a case of giving Obama more credit than he ought be given, but there are consistant signals being given that tell us what his actual intentions are.
    Obama has only furthered a process begun by others, that of bringing about as hard a swing towards the progressive left as is possible of this nation and the institutions left standing.
    Intentions be damned, and words are cheap. This so called health care situation is not about our heatlh, and neither are any of the so called Cap & Trade solutions about reducing our carbon footprints; they are both loaded shotguns pointed at our firgurative heads. They are both about control, and not through the niceties of the constitution. They are not only in the U.S. I’m certain from reading here that tyrants of all stripes reside other than in the U.S. alone, and they all seem working towards a so called one world governing body.
    Obama has shown himself to be both incompetent and impotent, or so it seems. That works to the benefit of those still concerned with matters of liberty, but I believe that if the opposition to Obama diminishes it will be to the detriment of us all.
    The act of protectionism Obama initiated has more to do with internal politics than any outside interests. I think that is because Obama has Marxist ideals to fulfill, and permitting a free response by the nation is contrary to his purposes. I really am becoming more convinced that he has little problems acting against actual U.S. interests when doing so bolsters his positions. How many times will he prostrate himself before others in the name of the United States of America?

  • You are right Michael, I should have qualified the word ‘incompetency’ with the word ‘perceived’.

  • RRS

    Mr. Staab –

    That last phrase should have read:

    How many times will he prostrate the United States of America before others in the name of “I?”

  • Lindsay

    Small correction — it was the 70th anniversary of STALIN’S invasion of Poland, not Hitler’s. The communists were a little slow out of the gate. For this they were rewarded with international amnesia, and the eastern third of Poland.

  • Robert Speirs

    Obama has been so careful that not only has he not done anything right, he hasn’t even done anything wrong! At least that’s what he would like you to believe. A man shows his character by the kind of errors he makes in life.

  • veryretired

    There is a very nice analysis at Powerline regarding this issue. The author’s premise is that these supposed gaffes are not that at all, but very pointed gestures towards both our opponents and our allies, with a specific meaning that is intentional and well understood by both sender and receiver.

  • Or it could just be a cigar?

  • Johnathan Pearce

    Thanks for pointing out my historical error about Poland. As a result, Mr Obama’s timing, if only as a diplomatic goof, is even worse.

  • Paul Marks

    The order to backstab Poland was not announced on the 70th anniversary of Hitler’s invasion J.P.

    It was annouced on the 70th anniversary of the SOVIET invasion of Poland (as part of the National Socialist/Marxist alliance) – a few days after the German invasion of Poland.

    You are quite wrong J.P. – Obama’ s policy is “deft”, as long as you understand what his objectives are (in this case to honour the anniversary of the liberation of Reactionary Poland by Progresssive forces).

    Ditto the import tax on tyres – reward key union allies and (hopefully) to generate a trade war.

    In the Iranian case – the objective is to undermine the Iranian opposition and to support the regime. Not because Barack Obama agrees with “12er” theology (“if we cover the world with fire, the Hidden Iman will emerge on his white horse and rule, and we will sit at his right hand”) in fact he thinks it is utterly absurd. But it is very useful to have such people in charge of Iran – both in causing chaos in the Middle East and inflicting a lot of damage on the West in general.

    Barack Obama is a careful man – he does nothing too dramatically or on too blatently (everything must be deniable). He is motivated by a fanatical hatred of the West in general and the United States in particular – but he never lets his hatred lead him into rash actions. He only does what he thinks he can get away with.

    Barack Obama is very professional – and I admire that.

  • Paul Marks

    China holds a lot of U.S. debt.

    So what?

    There has been the biggest increase in the monetary base in United States history over the last year (yes bigger than during any year of World War II).

    The Treasury sells debt to people who KNOW IN ADVANCE that the Federal Reserve will come along the next day (yes – within 24 hours) and buy the debt (with money it creates out of nothing). The people are happy – because they make a profit in the buying and selling.

    China is not needed in this process. And if it was – why should Barack Obama care?

    How is the economic destruction of the United States against his objectives – as long as he can (via the “mainstream” media and the education system) simply blame “greedy corporations” for the suffering.

    After all lying films and books are used every day in American schools (even on the youngest children).

    Blatant lies – “half of government spending is on the military”, “only 4% of the forests are left” “it is the government’s job to take care of all of us – that is what “general welfare” means in the Constitution”.

    Lie, after lie after lie – even before the children reach puberty. Sometimes the film will be funded by a Communist group (such as the Tides Foundation) but if they are not so funded the CONTENT of the film (or textbook) is the same. As the Marxists control the universities – see who the author of the leading texts in teacher training is. Bill Ayers is that author (Social Justice education – something Marxists added to Marxism decades ago, although Karl Marx himself would have regarded it as “unscientific”) and Bill Ayers has the same objective as when he and Jeff Jones (now in control of the Apollo Project in New York, the people who wrote the Bill for the HUNDRED OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS in the “Stimulus” scheme) where organizing the firebombing of policemen’s private homes in New York.

    Hoping to burn their children alive – oh dear the censor on the Economist magazine will not like me mentioning that Bill Ayers and Jeff Jones (and Obama’s other pals) wanted to burn alive the children of policemen (and still do).

    “But the corporations will resist Paul”.

    Why should they do that?

    After all – General Electric (one of the biggest and most diverse of the American corporations) would not even exist without the massive, indirect, support the Federal Reserve has given to G.E. Capital over the last year.

    Oh yes – the Federal Reserve buys corporate debt, as well as government debt.

  • Paul, if so, why backstab Poland on that particular anniversary of all other dates? Wouldn’t that actually be considered dramatic and blatant, and defeat the supposed purpose of deniability?

  • vimothy

    Two points:

    The tire tariff is a non-issue, IMHO. China riases tariffs on chicken feet. Big deal. Worry about the massive transfer of wealth to the financial sector before you worry about the marginal transfer of wealth from chicken feet producers to tire producers.

    The missile shield has not been abandoned, the US is merely shifting to THAAD missiles and SM-3s, which are better equipped to deal with (the much more likely) Iranian short to medium range missiles than (non-existant) Iranian ICBMs. Furthermore, SecDef Gates announced this in April 09.

  • jsallison

    Obama and his wife are corrupt, Daley machine, second rate Chicago hacks, forgive me, I repeat myself.

  • Paul Marks

    Good point Alisa – if the United States did not have an in-the-tank mainstream media.

    But, as you know, it does.

    How many people in the United States know that the announcement was on the anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland?

    “That is where you are wrong Paul – MILLIONS know that”.

    But how many of these millions are people who do not watch the Glenn Beck show or a few other shows?

    None of them.

    And most people (even though they distrust it) get their news from the “mainstream” media.

    The media that will never expose Obama – partly because their share some ideolgy with him, but also because they have hitched their wagon to him.

    For the last couple of years the “mainstream” media have been saying Barack Obama is a saint.

    If most people get to understand that Barack Obama is a Maxist scumbag it will not just be him that is finished – it will be his media fan club as well.

    And the “education system” of schools and universities – that have also acted as his fan club.

    They all stand or fall together – and they know it.

  • Paul, my point is that the anniversary must have been a coincidence, because if it was done on purpose, it would have been pointless without full media exposure.

  • vimothy

    You are not listening — ballistic missle defence is not being abandoned: the US will now use THAAD and SM-3 assets, as well as increased Aegis presence, to provide theatre missle defence for Europe. Furthermore, this was announced by SecDef Gates in April 09. See link below. Nothing to do with the Soviet invasion of Poland, FFS. This is like reading a discussion between troofers or Larouchians. A reality free zone.


  • vimothy

    Well, my last comment seems to have been eaten by gremlins because I tried to link to SecDef Gates’ April 09 speech wherein all this was revealed. Lemme then recap: Ballistic missile defence for Europe has not, repeat has not, been abandoned. The US is shifting to THAAD and SM-3 assets, and increasing Aegis capacity (and for good reasons). Furthermore, this non-abandonment did not coincide with the anniversary of any invasion, Poland or otherwise. It was announced five months ago. Ladies and gentlemen, un-puff your chests.

  • Paul Marks

    I disagree Alisa.

    It had a point – in Obama’s own mind.

    This is a man who has spent his whole adult life being very careful what he says never letting outsiders “know what I am thinking” (as he puts it in one of his autobiographies) , he can not say the things he want to say even now as a President.

    Say he went on national television and shouted (as he longs to do) “Death-to-America” he would be finished – he might still be President, but his power and influence would be zero.

    He can not praise his mentors – even Frank Marshall Davis (from his early years) is transmuted into just “Frank” in his autobiographical writings, and his Marxism is ommitted.

    Barack Obama can never even truly praise his own mother.

    He can not say “my mother and father met at their Russian language class, and whilst my father left the family early my mother schooled me for three hours a day in the Marxist cause – and since her tragically early dead I have done what I could to make her proud of me”.

    Can you think how PAINFUL it must be for Barack Obama to never be able to publically say that?

    But what he can do is little gestures (known to himself and his closest allies – but not known to the general population) such as the timeing of his recent policy announcment.

  • vimothy

    And what about the fact that this policy was announced by SecDef Gates in April ’09?