The Enigmas of Obama

I sympathized with Barack Obama not because I campaigned in the Democratic Party (nor in the Republican Party; as a journalist, I try to remain impartial), nor did I sympathize because the shameful past of the United States hurts me with regard to racial discrimination. No. He seemed to be an honest leader who would change the course of this nation.

The issue is not of sympathies, but of results. The ambiguity of his decisions is concerning. Of how the “new” terrorist threat took him by surprise. The incompleteness of his campaign promises annoys me. His precarious political and social strength, and the complete absence of national and international leadership.

He made a mistake in delaying immigration reform and blaming his Republican opponents. It would appear that he fears exercising his presidential powers to the fullest extent of his obligation. We know that he doesn’t have absolute control over this power, but we need a ruler “with more pants,” like my mother would say.

He made a mistake in his economic policy that keeps us on the brink of another financial crisis. It has not managed to stop the upward spiral in the basic products of the family basket, for example.

He made a mistake with his health plan that, although at first it appeared to be a positive alternative for the poor, upon dissecting it and examining it better with a magnifying glass it appears to be a plan designed by minds of the left, whose consequences we will see in the future.

He made a mistake in maintaining a stretched hand to radical Muslims while the fundamentalist terrorist groups grew for everyone to see. I heavily doubt that the CIA did not inform Obama of this threat to “national security,” the term used in his televised address to justify the aerial offensive against the Islamic State.

Now he comes with all the “verraquera,”* as us Colombians say, in order to counter the enemies which before he did not see: “We will degrade, and ultimately destroy, ISIL through a comprehensive and sustained counter-terrorism strategy.” I remember his face at the end of the televised address: It appeared as if he had been forced to make a decision that contradicts his pacifistic ideas and thoughts.

An analogy made me panic in an interview with The New Yorker magazine last January; the president compared the Islamic State to a basketball team composed of amateurs.

The big question is how in these few months the Islamic State, or ISIS, as it wants to be called, ceased being a small secondary team to becoming the worst threat of the “tournament” in the mind of Obama. It isn’t a secret that behind the Islamic State’s terrorist barrage are powerful economic interests from the oil mafias and arms dealers. It is an organization without a visible leader, which makes it more dangerous.

Obama caused me more panic when last August the most powerful country in the world did not have a strategy to combat these terrorists.

But who counsels and advises Barack Obama?

For now, we will continue to be intrigued by the great enigmas of the president, his ambiguity, and his true political passions.

*Translator’s Note: The best English translation would be enthusiasm.