Obama Still Hesitates
Published in Die Welt
(Germany) on 14 May 2009
by Uwe Schmitt (link to original)
Obama’s decision to not release more torture photographs has caused outrage among American liberals. But with that decision, Obama demonstrates once more that when it comes to winning Afghan hearts, he won’t be driven by one particular ideology.
American liberals groan in disbelief, Republicans praise him against their will: Barack Obama, with his decision not to release photos of U.S. troops abusing prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan, has shown both political camps that neither of them can claim him ideologically. Obama’s supporters grumble that he bases his change of policy on “national security” concerns, i.e., with a formula that served to stifle even the most legitimate requests for clarification during the Bush/Cheney era.
But is the president’s about-face wrong? Should it be condemned as weakness? Barack Obama says he fears release of the photographs would “further inflame anti-American opinion” without adding to our knowledge of the abuse. That’s an arguable point, but not even Obama can arbitrate between a Pentagon that supports his decision and an American Civil Liberties Union that doesn’t.
Apart from that, it’s a matter of the new Afghanistan strategy. By just putting 20,000 more troops on the ground, Obama cannot hope to change the hearts and minds of people who have been convinced by the Taliban to become terrorists. Far too many civilians are dying as the result of misguided American firepower. Obama needs the trust of the people if he wants to keep Afghanistan from becoming his Vietnam.
Now the Supreme Court will make the decision whether avoiding potential danger to U.S. troops should take precedence over releasing proof of their excesses. Barack Obama has corrected what he determined to be his own mistake. That’s what happens when you elect a professor of constitutional law as president.
American liberals groan in disbelief, Republicans praise him against their will: Barack Obama, with his decision not to release photos of U.S. troops abusing prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan, has shown both political camps that neither of them can claim him ideologically. Obama’s supporters grumble that he bases his change of policy on “national security” concerns, i.e., with a formula that served to stifle even the most legitimate requests for clarification during the Bush/Cheney era.
But is the president’s about-face wrong? Should it be condemned as weakness? Barack Obama says he fears release of the photographs would “further inflame anti-American opinion” without adding to our knowledge of the abuse. That’s an arguable point, but not even Obama can arbitrate between a Pentagon that supports his decision and an American Civil Liberties Union that doesn’t.
Apart from that, it’s a matter of the new Afghanistan strategy. By just putting 20,000 more troops on the ground, Obama cannot hope to change the hearts and minds of people who have been convinced by the Taliban to become terrorists. Far too many civilians are dying as the result of misguided American firepower. Obama needs the trust of the people if he wants to keep Afghanistan from becoming his Vietnam.
Now the Supreme Court will make the decision whether avoiding potential danger to U.S. troops should take precedence over releasing proof of their excesses. Barack Obama has corrected what he determined to be his own mistake. That’s what happens when you elect a professor of constitutional law as president.
Next article![]( "Backward Somersault")
