Obama’s Overseas Trip: a Missed Lesson to Make Up
Published in Beijing Sina
(China) on July 21, 2008
by Li Xuejiang (link to original)
(China) on July 21, 2008
by Li Xuejiang (link to original)
Translated from
by Eli Chiu.
Edited by .
Senator Obama’s overseas trip to the Middle East and Europe began last weekend, and has caused a great deal of attention in the U.S. and around the world. This is due to the fact that the world will treat and regard him as a hopeful to the U.S. presidency, regardless of whether he is inside or outside the country. Encouragement by a great amount of mainstream media, substantial news coverage, strict security measures, and his high-level reception by the Afghan government, serve as evidence of this.
He has been busy with the campaign, so why did Obama choose to visit the Middle East and Europe at this time? He chose to do this because Obama has exposed two soft ribs to his Republican opponent, who constantly attacked him during the first half of the campaign year. The first of the two soft ribs is the military and security issue. Republican supporters pointed out that, compared to Vietnam War veteran McCain, Obama is nothing but a rock-n-roll star with a glib tongue, who is unqualified for the post of commander-in-chief due to a lack of experience and intelligence. A commercial put forward by McCain’s camp criticized that Obama had never been to Afghanistan, and had not visited Iraq in recent years. Due to his lack of battlefield understanding, his assertion of troop withdrawal is found to be lacking. He had only paid lip service at home, and was not willing to visit the battlefield to hear the field commander's viewpoint.
Therefore, Obama had no choice but to urgently make-up the missed military and security lesson. After arriving in Afghanistan, he went to the military compound in the war-wrecked eastern area, had breakfast with the soldiers, and took in briefings given by American military officers, soldiers, and local officials. His actions are represented in his speeches: “Obviously, I want to converse with military commanders in Afghanistan and Iraq, and understand what they are most concerned about... I am more interested in listening than talking.”
So far, there are as many as 36,000 U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan, which is far fewer than the soldiers in Iraq. Upholding a belief that Afghanistan is the main battleground in the fight against terrorism, Obama has consistently opposed and criticized the Iraq War. He accuses the Bush administration of “being single-minded in its focus on Iraq and neglect of Afghanistan.” If he were to be elected, he would withdraw a brigade or two from Iraq each month, and evacuate the main combat unit within 16 months. In the meantime, two brigades of 7000 soldiers would be dispatched and stationed in Afghanistan. Obama was delighted by Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki's comments of approval, who said in an interview with a German reporter, “Obama's 16-month window, with the possibility of slight changes, is the right timeframe for a withdrawal.'' Coincidentally, under the Iraqi government's insistence, the American government eventually mapped out a tentative timetable for a withdrawal of troops within the framework of the two countries’ security accord. As such, although it is too early to judge at which points Obama's journey is a success, so far, it has already achieved something.
Obama’s second soft rib is his lack of international experience and diplomatic practice during his post as a Senator. Obama once proclaimed that he is willing to engage in dialogue and negotiate with the leaders of Cuba, Iran, North Korea, and so on. However, this has become a joystick for his Republican opponent to attack him, claiming that the idea of “unconditional” negotiations with enemy leaders demonstrates Obama’s “diplomatic naivety.” Nevertheless, Obama’s inclination towards multilateral foreign policy pleases and comforts the European Union, who suffer from the bitterness of U.S. unilateralism. This, however, makes Israel feel insecure. Therefore, after visiting Iraq, Obama continued his journey to Jordan and Israel, and gave a safety guarantee to Israel in an attempt to win the support of Jewish voters in the U.S. He will also receive a warm reception from the leaders of Germany, France, and the U.K., who look forward to meeting him.
Obama will gain his harvest in two ways. First, he will demonstrate his communicative capability and will obtain more diplomatic experience from contact with the leaders of great nations. Second, he will prove that he can better improve the international image of the U.S., as well as repair damaged relations with European allies caused by the Iraq War. Obama’s trip this time may be said to be “one stone, several birds.” It is expected that he will receive multi-dimensional gains.
Nevertheless, Obama’s Republican rival didn’t idly stand by. McCain pointed out, “In a time of war, the commander-in-chief doesn't get a learning curve. If I have that privilege, I will bring to the job many years of military and political experience.” Nevertheless, we have to wait until the American voters make their final ruling in the early November election to see who is most qualified to hold the post of U.S. President and Commander-in-Chief.
He has been busy with the campaign, so why did Obama choose to visit the Middle East and Europe at this time? He chose to do this because Obama has exposed two soft ribs to his Republican opponent, who constantly attacked him during the first half of the campaign year. The first of the two soft ribs is the military and security issue. Republican supporters pointed out that, compared to Vietnam War veteran McCain, Obama is nothing but a rock-n-roll star with a glib tongue, who is unqualified for the post of commander-in-chief due to a lack of experience and intelligence. A commercial put forward by McCain’s camp criticized that Obama had never been to Afghanistan, and had not visited Iraq in recent years. Due to his lack of battlefield understanding, his assertion of troop withdrawal is found to be lacking. He had only paid lip service at home, and was not willing to visit the battlefield to hear the field commander's viewpoint.
Therefore, Obama had no choice but to urgently make-up the missed military and security lesson. After arriving in Afghanistan, he went to the military compound in the war-wrecked eastern area, had breakfast with the soldiers, and took in briefings given by American military officers, soldiers, and local officials. His actions are represented in his speeches: “Obviously, I want to converse with military commanders in Afghanistan and Iraq, and understand what they are most concerned about... I am more interested in listening than talking.”
So far, there are as many as 36,000 U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan, which is far fewer than the soldiers in Iraq. Upholding a belief that Afghanistan is the main battleground in the fight against terrorism, Obama has consistently opposed and criticized the Iraq War. He accuses the Bush administration of “being single-minded in its focus on Iraq and neglect of Afghanistan.” If he were to be elected, he would withdraw a brigade or two from Iraq each month, and evacuate the main combat unit within 16 months. In the meantime, two brigades of 7000 soldiers would be dispatched and stationed in Afghanistan. Obama was delighted by Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki's comments of approval, who said in an interview with a German reporter, “Obama's 16-month window, with the possibility of slight changes, is the right timeframe for a withdrawal.'' Coincidentally, under the Iraqi government's insistence, the American government eventually mapped out a tentative timetable for a withdrawal of troops within the framework of the two countries’ security accord. As such, although it is too early to judge at which points Obama's journey is a success, so far, it has already achieved something.
Obama’s second soft rib is his lack of international experience and diplomatic practice during his post as a Senator. Obama once proclaimed that he is willing to engage in dialogue and negotiate with the leaders of Cuba, Iran, North Korea, and so on. However, this has become a joystick for his Republican opponent to attack him, claiming that the idea of “unconditional” negotiations with enemy leaders demonstrates Obama’s “diplomatic naivety.” Nevertheless, Obama’s inclination towards multilateral foreign policy pleases and comforts the European Union, who suffer from the bitterness of U.S. unilateralism. This, however, makes Israel feel insecure. Therefore, after visiting Iraq, Obama continued his journey to Jordan and Israel, and gave a safety guarantee to Israel in an attempt to win the support of Jewish voters in the U.S. He will also receive a warm reception from the leaders of Germany, France, and the U.K., who look forward to meeting him.
Obama will gain his harvest in two ways. First, he will demonstrate his communicative capability and will obtain more diplomatic experience from contact with the leaders of great nations. Second, he will prove that he can better improve the international image of the U.S., as well as repair damaged relations with European allies caused by the Iraq War. Obama’s trip this time may be said to be “one stone, several birds.” It is expected that he will receive multi-dimensional gains.
Nevertheless, Obama’s Republican rival didn’t idly stand by. McCain pointed out, “In a time of war, the commander-in-chief doesn't get a learning curve. If I have that privilege, I will bring to the job many years of military and political experience.” Nevertheless, we have to wait until the American voters make their final ruling in the early November election to see who is most qualified to hold the post of U.S. President and Commander-in-Chief.