In The Media
Michele Dunne, Robert Kagan
{
"authors": [
"Robert Kagan"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Europe"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States"
],
"topics": [
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
Obama's 5 Foreign-Policy Victories
In the month of June, the Obama administration achieved a number of foreign policy successes regarding Afghanistan, Iran, Japan, South Korea, and Russia.
By Robert Kagan
Published on Jun 29, 2010
Source: The Washington Post
President Obama's biggest move, of course, was naming Gen. David Petraeus commander in Afghanistan. The decision signaled Obama's determination to succeed in Afghanistan, despite the growing chorus of wise men counseling, as our wise men always seem to do, a rapid retreat. Those in the region who have been calculating on an American departure in July 2011, regardless of conditions on the ground, should think again. That date was never realistic, and the odds that Petraeus will counsel a premature withdrawal -- or be ordered to withdraw regardless of his assessment of the situation -- is infinitesimal.
The second success was the U.N. Security Council resolution on Iran. Yes, it was too mild, badly watered down by China and Russia. Yes, the administration oversold how much Russia acceded to American desires. But the administration did get a resolution, only a little later than planned, and passage kicked off additional sanctions by Europeans and others. Will this by itself stop Iran from getting a bomb? No. But it does increase the pressure on the Tehran regime, which may indirectly help those Iranians who dare to struggle for a new kind of government.
Nor did Turkey and Brazil's votes against the resolution, following their pro-Iranian diplomacy, do more than discredit their leaders in decent world opinion -- imagine voting no even as China and Russia vote yes. The idea that their actions heralded their emergence as world powers is off the mark. If anything, they diminished and slowed what had been their rise to global respectability. Brazil's Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva looked silly and out of his depth. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan solidified Turkey's image as the lone NATO member that chooses Iran and Syria over its allies. Good work.
But the administration handled that well, too. A Jimmy Carter might have felt compelled to applaud Turkey and Brazil. An administration determined to avoid confrontation with Iran might even have swung behind their diplomatic efforts. Led by Hillary Clinton, this administration gave them the back of its hand and made clear that they were not ready to play in the big leagues. Going a step further, it has declared that Turkey's behavior is damaging its relationship with the United States and its NATO allies. Assistant Secretary of State Philip Gordon warned last week that Turkish actions have placed its "orientation" in doubt and were making it "harder for the United States to support some of the things that Turkey would like to see us support." That was exactly the right message.
The administration's policy toward Japan hasn't been pretty, but it has worked. Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama's resignation this month had to do with his mishandling of the dispute over the American base in Okinawa and his broader attempt to reorient Japanese foreign policy toward a middle course between the United States and China. The Obama administration was firm but engaged, and the result has been Japanese reaffirmation of its commitment to the U.S. alliance. This has more to do with Japan's fear of China than anything else, but the administration deserves credit for helping steer it in the right direction.
Separately, President Obama signaled a new determination to achieve a free-trade agreement with South Korea. After many hollow claims by administration officials that the United States "is back" in Asia, this would be the first actual evidence. If Congress can be persuaded to pass the agreement -- and Obama's own party has been the chief obstacle -- it will help correct this administration's excessive and largely unsuccessful efforts to make China the cornerstone of U.S. policy in Asia.
Finally, on an issue where the administration has been weakest, there was a sign of a shift. Amid the happy talk and hamburgers last week, the administration made clear that there is one area of continuing disagreement between the United States and Russia: Georgia. In its public "Reset Fact Sheet," the White House declared that the "Obama Administration continues to have serious disagreements with the Russian government over Georgia. We continue to call for Russia to end its occupation of the Georgian territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia." The word "occupation" is a clear sign that the administration has not swept this issue under the rug. Maybe Obama understands that the "reset" will never be a success so long as Russian troops continue to occupy their neighbors' territories.
Is there much to criticize in the administration's overall handling of foreign and defense policy? Of course, and there will be in the future. But it was a good month. For now the administration deserves congratulations for getting a number of things right.
About the Author
Robert Kagan
Former Senior Associate
Kagan, author of the recent book, The Return of History and the End of Dreams (Knopf 2008), writes a monthly column on world affairs for the Washington Post and is a contributing editor at both the Weekly Standard and the New Republic.
- Why Egypt Has To Be The U.S. Priority In The Middle East
- U.S. Policy Toward Egypt—A Primer on the Upcoming ElectionsCommentary
Robert Kagan, Michele Dunne
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- The Iran War’s Global ReachCollection
As the war between the United States, Israel, and Iran continues, Carnegie scholars contribute cutting-edge analysis on the events of the war and their wide-reaching implications. From the impact on Iran and its immediate neighbors to the responses from Gulf states to fuel and fertilizer shortages caused by the effective shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz, the war is reshaping Middle East alliances and creating shockwaves around the world. Carnegie experts analyze it all.
- Amid Iran War, Gulf Countries Slow the Pace of ReformsArticle
The return of war as the organizing factor in Middle Eastern politics has predictable consequences: governments are prioritizing regime stability and becoming averse to political and social reform.
Sarah Yerkes, Amr Hamzawy
- Power, Pathways, and Policy: Grounding Central Asia’s Digital AmbitionsCommentary
Central Asia’s digital ambitions are achievable, but only if policy is aligned with the region’s physical constraints.
Aruzhan Meirkhanova
- Taking the Pulse: Can NATO Survive the Iran War?Commentary
Donald Trump has repeatedly bashed NATO and European allies, threatening to annex Canada and Greenland and deploring their lack of enthusiasm for his war of choice in Iran. Is this latest round of abuse the final straw?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- The Impact of Ending U.S. International Media AssistancePaper
The future looks bleak for independent media worldwide, but there is a robust infrastructure of knowledge, organizations, and people to build upon.
Daniel Sabet, Susan Abbott
