Our Changing Globe

Archive for the ‘secretary of state’ Category

Rice: Iraq withdrawal threatens US gains – The Hill's Video

thehill.com11/6/11

Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice warned Sunday that President Obama's plan to pull all U. S..

Obama's Tragic Iraq Withdrawal – Council on Foreign Relations

www.cfr.org10/31/11

Max Boot says the end of the U.S. military mission in Iraq is not a triumph but a defeat for the United States.

---

So Why did the US Lose In Iraq?

It must, in all fairness be said, that Barack Obama was critical of the Iraq war from its beginning.

But when he became president in January 2009, he was handed a war that had already been won!

The surge had succeeded!

Al-Qaeda in Iraq had been routed, driven to a humiliating defeat by an Anbar Awakening of Sunnis fighting side-by-side with the infidel Americans!

And perhaps even more remarkably, the Shiite militias had been taken down, with U.S. backing, by the forces of Shiite Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki!

The Sadr militias from Basra to Sadr City had been crushed!

So Obama Inherited A Very Simple Task

He simply needed to negotiate a new (SOFA) Status-of-forces agreement in order to reinforce the gains and to create a strategic partnership with the Arab world’s only democracy.

But he blew it, and negotiations, such as they were, finally collapsed in October 2011.

There is no longer an agreement, and no partnership, and as of Dec. 31, and the U.S. military presence in Iraq will to all intents and purposes be ended.

So How Did The Obama Administration Blow It?

The deadline didn’t suddenly sneak up on Obama because he had three years to prepare for it, and everyone involved, both Iraqi and American, knew that the 2008 SOFA which called for full U.S. withdrawal was meant to be renegotiated.

And all the major parties but one, the Sadr faction, had an interest in maintaining a residual stabilizing U.S. force, similar to the postwar deployments in Japan, Germany and Korea.

Joe Biden Was Handed The Negotiating Job

During the last three years, there were two abject and serious failures.

The First Major Failure Was Caused By

The administration’s inability, at the height of American post-surge power, to broker a centrist nationalist coalition governed by the major blocs.

Between

The predominantly Shiite (Maliki’s).

The predominantly Sunni (Ayad Allawi’s).

And the Kurds who won a large majority (69 percent) of the seats in the 2010 election.

Vice President Biden was given this relatively simple job, but even this was way beyond his limited capabilities.

(Why did Obama choose Biden as his vice president?).

The Iraqi government ended up effectively being run by a narrow sectarian coalition wherein the balance of power is held by a relatively small (12%) Iranian-client Sadr faction.

The Second Failure Was

Obama’s Status-Of-Forces Agreement!

U.S. commanders recommended approximately 20,000 troops, which would have been considerably fewer than our 28,500 in Korea, 40,000 in Japan and 54,000 in Germany but our president rejected those proposals, and chose instead a level of 3,000 to 5,000 troops.

The President’s Decision Was Therefore Doomed To Failure!

Because a deployment so incredibly small will effectively have to expend ALL its energies simply protecting itself.

The Lebanese Deployment

Similar to our tragic and somewhat aimless 1982 Lebanon deployment, we’ll now be left with.

No capability to train the Iraqis.

No capability to build their U.S. equipped air force.

And no capability to mediate ethnic disputes.

Did Obama Really Want A Successful Outcome?

Almost certainly, "No", he didn’t!

Because Obama’s proposal was an unmistakable signal of unseriousness, and it quickly became clear that he just wanted out.

Some Proof Of What I’m Writing?

Massoud Barzani, who has been the leader of the Kurds for two decades and was the staunchest of U.S. allies, just visited Tehran to bend a knee to both President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Obama’s Lame Excuse

Our friends should not have been left out in the cold to seek Iranian protection.

Three years and a won war gave Obama the opportunity to establish a lasting strategic alliance with the Arab world’s second most important power.

Obama’s excuse is the Iraqi refusal to grant legal immunity to U.S. forces, but the Bush administration encountered the same problem and overcame it.

Obama obviously had little desire to so however, and is now attempting to portray the withdrawal as a success.

So Why Didn’t Obama Want To Win?

Obama opposed the war which is understandable.

But when he became commander in chief, the terrible price had already been paid in blood and treasure, so surely his obligation was to make something of that sacrifice, to secure the strategic gains that sacrifice had already achieved?!

The Bottom Line

Years from now, we will most likely still be asking, not,

"How did the US lose the war in Iraq?".

But, "Why did the Obama Administration do it?".

Articles and comments about Hilary Clinton’s low profile, and lack of visibility are appearing more frequently in the media, and not without good reason.

Every other Secretary of State that I can think of was very high profile and travelled with their President on almost every overseas trip, but Obama is keeping Hilary almost cloistered, and if he does give her a job then it’s one that will damage her politically.

Before being appointed Secretary of State, Hilary was known to be very pro-Israel, but the only high profile job that she has so far been was given was to heavily criticize its settlement’s policy and demand that it stop building new ones and tear down existing ones.

According to CBS News Hilary won 54% of the Jewish vote during the primaries compared to Obama’s 43%, so causing Hilary to alienate herself from the Jewish vote would be the politically shrewd if he fears her.

May’s opinion polls gave Hilary a 71% approval rating, compared to 65% for Obama, so a strategy of keeping her out of the public’s eye and damaging her whenever possible would make a lot of sense if things start to look iffy for 2012.

The way that Hilary is presently being handled in some ways mirrors Bibi Netanyahu’s handling of Avigdor Lieberman, but the reasons for such handling are very different.

Bibi knows that Lieberman is perceived by Obama and most European heads of state as extremely right wing, and Lieberman doesn’t mince his words and could therefore spell trouble.

Netanyahu therefore uses Ehud Barak who is the head of the left leaning Labor party to cover the United States, and has Lieberman deal with the Russians. Lieberman also gets to do European trips because he is the head of Israel’s biggest coalition party and Bibi sees Europe as far less important anyway.

Obama is at -8 in today’s Rasmussen poll and he has a very bumpy road ahead of him with the upcoming health reform and many other issues too. Unemployment might hit 14% this year and many Americans believe that Obama’s policies are burying the country so deep under debt that it may never recover.

Sarah Palin just took a big gamble and 71% of Republicans now say they would vote for her for president.

Tapping Hilary to be Secretary of State was a brilliant move, but if Obama overplays his hand and continues to keep her cloistered then her situation will eventually become untenable and she may be forced to resign and then we might find ourselves having to choose between Hilary and Palin in 2012.

Updated August 5, 2009

According to a just released Rasmussen opinion poll, if America were to elect a female president in the near future, it would be Hillary Clinton.

In a hypothetical match-up between the two most formidable female candidates in their respective parties, Clinton would defeat former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin 51% to 39%.

What is perhaps even more interesting, is that Clinton would defeat Obama by six points, 48% to 42%.

Women overwhelmingly favor Clinton over Palin, 59% to 32% whereas most men favor the GOP ex-governor by eight points, 48% to 40%.

Palin would get 71% of the Republican vote, and Clinton would capture 81% of Democrats.

Read the rest of this entry »