Americans Picked Lemon for President

By Con George-Kotzabasis

As we had predicted prior to the election of Obama, Americans had picked a lemon for president. Both on the issues of the post-election turmoil in Iran and the START Follow-on Treaty in Moscow, Obama chose to take a weak position to ‘save’ his new diplomacy, as I foreshadowed he would do in a paper of mine, which if you wish you can read at Daring Thoughts

In the case of Iran, astonishingly, neither Obama nor any of his senior advisers were able to foresee the great potential for regime change that the revolt of the educated modernist forces of Iran were and are still fuelling for the near future, especially if the U.S. and its allies were prepared to take a stronger stand against the Mullahcracy and Ahmadinejad, as I had suggested to do in the above paper. Obama however chose to take the position of least resistance, not to “meddle” only to be accused later, as was expected, by the regime of meddling in the internal affairs of Iran. And the Group of Eight (G-8) In Italy this week, under the leadership of Obama, failed to reach consensus on tougher sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program. “According to Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini, the G-8 did not move for sanctions because the ‘conditions’ for tougher action against Iran ‘were not present.’ One can only marvel at the absence of such ‘conditions.’ Iran is not moving away from its intransigence in regard to its nuclear program, a large segment, if not the majority, of its population considers the Ahmadinejad regime as illegitimate and yet to the political savants of the G-8 these are not sufficient for harsher measures against the ‘imamocracy.’

In his negotiations with Russia, for the sake of an inutile unrealizable abstract goal of nuclear disarmament he sacrificed by putting in limbo the concrete goal of anti-ballistic missile defence of its European allies, in which technically the U.S. holds indubitable superiority. One can immediately see the farcical fallacy of Obama’s diplomatic overture to the Russians in regard to nuclear disarmament, which Obama in his press conference touted as a great opening for getting rid of nuclear weapons, when Moscow’s concern about the anti-ballistic shield was that it would be against its own nuclear armaments. If Russia in the future was willing to dismantle its nuclear armaments in reciprocation to America’s dismantling, why should it be concerned about the anti-ballistic shield set up in Poland and Czechoslovakia? It’s by such farcical diplomatic deeds that President Obama tries to dupe his American constituents that his new diplomacy is working.  

But the great danger lies that by the time the lemon is squeezed dry America’s vital interests will be sacrificed on the altar of an erroneous and historically false diplomacy. A diplomacy whose end result will be on the one hand the strengthening of America’s foes and on the other the weakening of America, pushing it off its Archimedean point as a benign superpower which up till now was able to ‘tilt’ the world toward relative political stability and economic prosperity. And one can easily presage that the clever and duplicitous enemies of the United States will just as easily checkmate all Obama’s naive moves on the chessboard of diplomacy to the great detriment of American prestige and power.   

~ by kotzabasis on July 12, 2009.

3 Responses to “Americans Picked Lemon for President”

  1. No offense, but I think you and every other seemingly-hard ball Republican is wrong on the issue of Iran.

    What the hell do you want him to do? Every person who says that Obama hasn’t done enough and are criticizing every aspect on his stance on those controversies fail to provide a course of action, let alone a feasible plan.

    There is only one thing to do: military support. And we all agree that in status quo, there is no way in any rational perspective that that is going to be regarded as the right thing to do, especially in the interests of the U.S. (which as an independent country combating its own internal dilemmas ought to make the societal welfare of its people its first priority).

    All Obama can do is firmly denounce Iran’s position on the elections, which he clearly has. Look, Iran is an entirely soverign nation, and it is immoral to even think about violating its autonomy when they had an election, and even a re-count of that election, which the governing bodies have claimed to legitimize the outcome.

    Think Bush in 2000 and the Florida votes, and the dubious results and the consequential debate that unfolded from there, and how the U.S. government didn’t do anything about it. What if another superpower which we disliked invaded our nation because the “government is suppressing us”.

    This the Iranians fight. They don’t want us to interfere. The government doesn’t, but moreover, the people who are rebelling don’t also.

    keep in mind, this is the same country which went against America and took hostage of innocent Americans. Infer if you can, they don’t really like us.

  2. Achal, thank you for your comment, if not for your abuse of your last post in the other thread.

    In my article “Obama Sails into Iran’s Rough Seas under False Colours,” I suggested a course of action that was not “military support,” which as you correctly point out such action would not have been “rational.” As you presumably now have read the article, I suggested that Obama should calibrate his response to the Iranians in the following terms:”That the United States and many other nations in the world would find it very difficult to engage with a regime that in the eyes of its OWN PEOPLE and of the world is an ILLEGITIMATE regime. Thus by casting a shadow of isolation from the world over the Khamenei-Ahmadinejad Theocracy, President Obama would tip the balance indirectly in favour of the ‘modernist’ opposition forces and the great potential this would have for the future of Iran…”

    I’m not a Republican, but I do favour and support strong leadership in these most dangerous of times. And the Republicans with all their faults by far outrun the Democrats on the stretch of strong leadership. It seems there is a political division in the pool of genes. All the strong ones are Republican-think of Reagan- and all the weak ones are Democrat-think of Clinton.

  3. Hi there, I think your web site might be having web browser compatibility issues. When I take a look at your site in Safari, it looks fine however, when opening in IE, it’s got some overlapping issues. I simply wanted to provide you with a quick heads up! Other than that, fantastic blog!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: