Barack Obama: A Leader Who Has Lost All Credibility?
The epitaph to the foreign policy of the Obama administration was written by Dick Cheney: “Our friends no longer trust us … and our adversaries no longer fear us.” Coming from him, this statement might appear motivated by self-interest. The ex-number two to George W. Bush and the man who is said to have inspired and proposed more than one of the then-president’s decisions, this fervent Republican is a biased man and a staunch opponent of Obama. But his words may well echo the views of many analysts. The explosion of Datagate, with the revelation of the United States’ espionage against numerous heads of state and governments around the world, including several of Washington’s allies, has ended up having an effect, above all, on what is any leader’s greatest asset: his credibility. This international scandal only serves to add to the long list of mistakes in foreign policy and the incredible failure to launch health care reform — events which have pushed the Obama administration to the brink of shutdown. If he doesn’t manage to win back some ground, he will find himself stuck at the White House for another three years, playing on the defensive without any room for political maneuver, like a sovereign stripped of his power.
A Farce of Lies and Denial
Angela Merkel was spied on in 2002 while she was still leader of the opposition and when the rift of tensions about Iraq was just beginning to form between Europe on the one hand and the United States of Bush on the other. The U.S. had only stopped monitoring her a few weeks before Barack Obama’s recent visit to Germany. According to the German news magazine Der Spiegel, the current president was aware of the fact that Merkel was being watched: The NSA had informed him in 2010 and he had given his consent. Sources at the NSA denied this version of the facts. Obama didn’t know; he had no knowledge of the events, they say.
Is this denial credible? It is certainly hard to believe that the president of the United States didn’t know the details of such an important and delicate program of espionage. If it really was the case that he was not informed, the only thing that can be said is that a part of the U.S. intelligence apparatus was working independently of political power — a state within the state. But this does not appear to have been the case.
Obama inherited a structure set in place by his predecessor, George W. Bush, and he has not taken steps to dismantle it. On the contrary, he has developed it with the primary intention of preventing terrorist attacks, as he himself declared a few months ago. But as has now come to light, this program of control was also used to discover the nature of foreign politics — including trade markets and monetary policy — and how it related to the governments of numerous nations, many of which were allies [of the United States]. Could Obama really not have known the nature of the surveillance on Angela Merkel?
Europe’s Disappointment
Europe has already given its answer to this question. In the government offices of the “Old World,” there is a sense of disappointment regarding Barack Obama. After years of comparison with George W. Bush, the current president was meant to be the one who was going to restore order and calm to transatlantic relations. It was supposed to be thanks to him that faith would replace the diffidence and mistrust that developed between Brussels and Washington at the time of the Iraq invasion. Indeed, this was the case for some time. The presupposed cooperation, transparency and reciprocal respect between the two continents was rediscovered and seemed indeed to still be in place — until just the other day.
Now, even if these values haven’t disappeared altogether, they have certainly been weakened with the revelations of Datagate. Obama has lost a great deal of credibility in the eyes of European governments: Just as his predecessor did before him, he has acted out of mistrust and suspicion — something that should have no place between allies. The mobile telephone of Frau Merkel, intercepted by the NSA, is proof of this mistrust. Four years ago, with Barack Obama in the White House, nobody would have bet a euro (or a dollar) on the fact that Europe and the United States would have witnessed a crisis such as was triggered by Datagate. If it is true that the European governments were aware of the fact that the U.S. was still conducting surveillance on the “Old World,” perhaps it is also the case that none of these governments would ever have thought that they themselves would be directly spied on — and especially not by Obama.
Foreign Policy Mistakes
The Datagate scandal in Europe is only the most recent piece of the jigsaw puzzle. The rest shows an even darker picture. Obama’s other foreign policy errors have undermined the credibility of his administration on an international scale.
1) Syria
For two years, Obama let the civil war rage. Then, when faced with gas attacks on the women and children there, he threatened to open fire on the army of Bashar Assad. Due to international and internal hostility — Congress was opposed to the measure — Obama retreated. The impasse was resolved by Russia. Vladimir Putin played his cards — [he proposed] a plan to dismantle the chemical weapons program of Russia’s ally, Syria, and to enter into negotiations with the U.N. — with such skill that he was able to renew the strength and international credibility of Moscow, to the detriment of Washington.
2) Egypt and the Arab Spring
Obama first endorsed Hosni Mubarak. After the first street deaths, he wanted his head on a plate. He pushed for a democratic trial, even though this meant the victory of the Muslim Brotherhood. He was in dialogue with President Morsi while the army was preparing a coup d’état behind his back. Following the cruel repression by the soldiers, he threatened to block military aid but never actually followed through with this plan. His hesitant politics produced one result: Obama’s America has lost its credibility with the Egyptian population and Washington’s force in the region has been weakened.
3) Libya, Benghazi and al-Qaida
Having crushed the Gadhafi regime, the U.S. doesn’t seem in a competent position to manage the future of Libya. The country is in chaos and Islamic terrorist groups have reinforced their strength. It was one of these groups that carried out the attack at Benghazi in 2011 in which four Americans lost their lives. U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens was among them, and his death was the culmination of a remarkable series of errors on the part of the U.S. security forces. More generally, notwithstanding the “trophy glory” that accompanied the elimination of Osama bin Laden and a few reassuring declarations on the part of the administration, the groups linked to al-Qaida have resumed action in the Middle East and in Africa. Among other “defeats” of Obama’s foreign policy, there was also the mass stampede of hundreds of Islamic terrorists in escape from the Iraqi prison of Abu Ghraib.
4) Drones and Anti-Americanism
With criticisms coming from human rights organizations and protests by the populations of those countries where dozens of civilian casualties have been recorded — Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen — Obama is also in the eye of the storm when it comes to his policy of eliminating terrorists using radio-controlled drone strikes. The decision to develop this policy in compliance with his predecessor has alienated him from the sympathies of the nation’s liberals, who consider such targeted homicide to be illegal. It has heralded the return of anti-American sentiment in those places where the drones have struck and taken the lives of innocent victims.
5) Iran
Many think that Obama’s policy regarding Tehran is overly cautious and will eventually enable Tehran to develop the atomic bomb. It is the Israelis, whose relationship with Obama is still defined by a cold detachment, who are particularly convinced of this. Furthermore, during the revolt that erupted in 2009 after the election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president of the U.S. did not utter a word of support for the demonstrators, who were cruelly repressed by the regime.
6) Russia
Vladimir Putin has regained an international role, thanks to Barack Obama. He was a determining factor in the resolving the Syrian crisis and has returned to a position of influence in Tehran. He cashed in on the decommissioning of part of the atomic arsenal of the U.S. and hosted Edward Snowden — the Datagate mole —effectively shutting the door in the face of American requests for extradition. It has been one blow after another, and Obama was not in a position to retaliate except by way of cancelling the face-to-face meeting he was due to have with the Russian president.
7) Datagate
The explosion of the scandal damaged relations with the allied countries, in particular the European allies. But Obama’s international credibility also suffered a tough blow more generally, as was shown by the clamorous protests of the Brazilian government to the U.N. Moreover — and perhaps not by coincidence — this business has enabled China to upset the balance of power with Washington. Before Edward Snowden spoke out about the NSA’s activity, it was Obama who was in a position to question Beijing about its cyberattacks against the United States. Now the tables have turned.
Things Aren't Much Better within the U.S.
The uncertainties of homeland policy must also be added to this list of errors. America has avoided default, but Obama has shown he cannot keep a hold over Congress. This signifies the reforms promised by the president will only be carried out in the event that Capitol Hill returns to a Democrat majority — and maybe, given Obama’s apparent weakness, not even then.
But the enduring emblem of his presidency, the potential (black) mark he risks leaving, may come from the failure to launch Obamacare. The software that comprises the website of the Department of Health and Human Services, which was supposed to record the names of millions of Americans who by law must now acquire health insurance, still doesn't work.
It is not a question of a simple technical glitch, as the White House keeps repeating, but something far more detrimental to the reform program as a whole that is so important to Obama. If they are unable to access the benefits and resources that the program offers, many of these Americans will be forced to go back to private companies or give up hope of aid altogether. It would mark the failure of Obama’s reform.
For the Obama administration, political credibility is an important asset whose value is quickly running out. The bottom of the barrel is close — very close.
A Farce of Lies and Denial
Angela Merkel was spied on in 2002 while she was still leader of the opposition and when the rift of tensions about Iraq was just beginning to form between Europe on the one hand and the United States of Bush on the other. The U.S. had only stopped monitoring her a few weeks before Barack Obama’s recent visit to Germany. According to the German news magazine Der Spiegel, the current president was aware of the fact that Merkel was being watched: The NSA had informed him in 2010 and he had given his consent. Sources at the NSA denied this version of the facts. Obama didn’t know; he had no knowledge of the events, they say.
Is this denial credible? It is certainly hard to believe that the president of the United States didn’t know the details of such an important and delicate program of espionage. If it really was the case that he was not informed, the only thing that can be said is that a part of the U.S. intelligence apparatus was working independently of political power — a state within the state. But this does not appear to have been the case.
Obama inherited a structure set in place by his predecessor, George W. Bush, and he has not taken steps to dismantle it. On the contrary, he has developed it with the primary intention of preventing terrorist attacks, as he himself declared a few months ago. But as has now come to light, this program of control was also used to discover the nature of foreign politics — including trade markets and monetary policy — and how it related to the governments of numerous nations, many of which were allies [of the United States]. Could Obama really not have known the nature of the surveillance on Angela Merkel?
Europe’s Disappointment
Europe has already given its answer to this question. In the government offices of the “Old World,” there is a sense of disappointment regarding Barack Obama. After years of comparison with George W. Bush, the current president was meant to be the one who was going to restore order and calm to transatlantic relations. It was supposed to be thanks to him that faith would replace the diffidence and mistrust that developed between Brussels and Washington at the time of the Iraq invasion. Indeed, this was the case for some time. The presupposed cooperation, transparency and reciprocal respect between the two continents was rediscovered and seemed indeed to still be in place — until just the other day.
Now, even if these values haven’t disappeared altogether, they have certainly been weakened with the revelations of Datagate. Obama has lost a great deal of credibility in the eyes of European governments: Just as his predecessor did before him, he has acted out of mistrust and suspicion — something that should have no place between allies. The mobile telephone of Frau Merkel, intercepted by the NSA, is proof of this mistrust. Four years ago, with Barack Obama in the White House, nobody would have bet a euro (or a dollar) on the fact that Europe and the United States would have witnessed a crisis such as was triggered by Datagate. If it is true that the European governments were aware of the fact that the U.S. was still conducting surveillance on the “Old World,” perhaps it is also the case that none of these governments would ever have thought that they themselves would be directly spied on — and especially not by Obama.
Foreign Policy Mistakes
The Datagate scandal in Europe is only the most recent piece of the jigsaw puzzle. The rest shows an even darker picture. Obama’s other foreign policy errors have undermined the credibility of his administration on an international scale.
1) Syria
For two years, Obama let the civil war rage. Then, when faced with gas attacks on the women and children there, he threatened to open fire on the army of Bashar Assad. Due to international and internal hostility — Congress was opposed to the measure — Obama retreated. The impasse was resolved by Russia. Vladimir Putin played his cards — [he proposed] a plan to dismantle the chemical weapons program of Russia’s ally, Syria, and to enter into negotiations with the U.N. — with such skill that he was able to renew the strength and international credibility of Moscow, to the detriment of Washington.
2) Egypt and the Arab Spring
Obama first endorsed Hosni Mubarak. After the first street deaths, he wanted his head on a plate. He pushed for a democratic trial, even though this meant the victory of the Muslim Brotherhood. He was in dialogue with President Morsi while the army was preparing a coup d’état behind his back. Following the cruel repression by the soldiers, he threatened to block military aid but never actually followed through with this plan. His hesitant politics produced one result: Obama’s America has lost its credibility with the Egyptian population and Washington’s force in the region has been weakened.
3) Libya, Benghazi and al-Qaida
Having crushed the Gadhafi regime, the U.S. doesn’t seem in a competent position to manage the future of Libya. The country is in chaos and Islamic terrorist groups have reinforced their strength. It was one of these groups that carried out the attack at Benghazi in 2011 in which four Americans lost their lives. U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens was among them, and his death was the culmination of a remarkable series of errors on the part of the U.S. security forces. More generally, notwithstanding the “trophy glory” that accompanied the elimination of Osama bin Laden and a few reassuring declarations on the part of the administration, the groups linked to al-Qaida have resumed action in the Middle East and in Africa. Among other “defeats” of Obama’s foreign policy, there was also the mass stampede of hundreds of Islamic terrorists in escape from the Iraqi prison of Abu Ghraib.
4) Drones and Anti-Americanism
With criticisms coming from human rights organizations and protests by the populations of those countries where dozens of civilian casualties have been recorded — Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen — Obama is also in the eye of the storm when it comes to his policy of eliminating terrorists using radio-controlled drone strikes. The decision to develop this policy in compliance with his predecessor has alienated him from the sympathies of the nation’s liberals, who consider such targeted homicide to be illegal. It has heralded the return of anti-American sentiment in those places where the drones have struck and taken the lives of innocent victims.
5) Iran
Many think that Obama’s policy regarding Tehran is overly cautious and will eventually enable Tehran to develop the atomic bomb. It is the Israelis, whose relationship with Obama is still defined by a cold detachment, who are particularly convinced of this. Furthermore, during the revolt that erupted in 2009 after the election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president of the U.S. did not utter a word of support for the demonstrators, who were cruelly repressed by the regime.
6) Russia
Vladimir Putin has regained an international role, thanks to Barack Obama. He was a determining factor in the resolving the Syrian crisis and has returned to a position of influence in Tehran. He cashed in on the decommissioning of part of the atomic arsenal of the U.S. and hosted Edward Snowden — the Datagate mole —effectively shutting the door in the face of American requests for extradition. It has been one blow after another, and Obama was not in a position to retaliate except by way of cancelling the face-to-face meeting he was due to have with the Russian president.
7) Datagate
The explosion of the scandal damaged relations with the allied countries, in particular the European allies. But Obama’s international credibility also suffered a tough blow more generally, as was shown by the clamorous protests of the Brazilian government to the U.N. Moreover — and perhaps not by coincidence — this business has enabled China to upset the balance of power with Washington. Before Edward Snowden spoke out about the NSA’s activity, it was Obama who was in a position to question Beijing about its cyberattacks against the United States. Now the tables have turned.
Things Aren't Much Better within the U.S.
The uncertainties of homeland policy must also be added to this list of errors. America has avoided default, but Obama has shown he cannot keep a hold over Congress. This signifies the reforms promised by the president will only be carried out in the event that Capitol Hill returns to a Democrat majority — and maybe, given Obama’s apparent weakness, not even then.
But the enduring emblem of his presidency, the potential (black) mark he risks leaving, may come from the failure to launch Obamacare. The software that comprises the website of the Department of Health and Human Services, which was supposed to record the names of millions of Americans who by law must now acquire health insurance, still doesn't work.
It is not a question of a simple technical glitch, as the White House keeps repeating, but something far more detrimental to the reform program as a whole that is so important to Obama. If they are unable to access the benefits and resources that the program offers, many of these Americans will be forced to go back to private companies or give up hope of aid altogether. It would mark the failure of Obama’s reform.
For the Obama administration, political credibility is an important asset whose value is quickly running out. The bottom of the barrel is close — very close.