Hope vs. Blood and Iron Part II: Obamapolitik Discredited
Some would ask how Obamapolitik could have already failed as Senator Obama has not yet been elected (and never will be!). It is rather simple, Obamapolitik and its three rules have already been employed during the Georgian crisis. The only difference is that it has not, as a policy, emanated from a single source. Let us recount the grand litany of failure that has been Obamapolitik thus far as Russia ignores the West at will.
From the first day of the invasion many of Obama’s idealogical allies in Europe, particularly those in Germany and France, as well as many liberals in the US, downplayed the Russian attack. Rather than condemn the invasion as the naked act of aggression that it is, the liberals and Europeans employed the hallowed Obamapolitik principle of moral relativism to render the Russians blameless. For example, many leading European news outlets painted Georgia as an aggressor as Der Spiegel did when it described the Georgian leader as “Mikhail Saakashvili, the young hothead sitting in the president’s chair in the Georgian capital Tbilisi.” Moreover, NBC, MSNBC and others have openly attacked President Bush for “taking sides”in this conflict (apparently this invasion, like rape in Islam, is the fault of the victim’s wicked ways).
Obama’s Team Attacks McCain For Calling the Russians the Aggressors
Following liberal and European prevecation and denial, came the second Obamapolitik rule in the form of the personal diplomacy of French President Nicolas Sarkozy. Rather than serve the Russians with an ultimatum or some other threat of real punitive action, The EU and UN relied on Sarkozy’s charm to talk the Russians down. The result was a nice photo-op, applause from the liberal media and a cease-fire the Russians have yet to honor.
Finally, Obama himself, as well as his parvenu surrogate, Bill Richardson, weighed in as to the next in dealing with the Russians. As the Russians had the temerity to violate the cease-fire and betray Sarkozy’s trust, it was obvious that stronger measures were necessary to finally intimidate the Russians into withdrawal. With great sterness and a heavy heart, Obama advocated the nuclear option of having the UN (gasp!) condemn Russia for its actions. While Obama and Richardson congratulated themselves for their Churchillian stand they both seemed to forget that Russia has a veto over any UN resolution. Whoops. Score one for the bad guys.
The result of the blitz of Obamapolitik has been very clear. Russia refuses to withdraw from Georgian territory and the West has been made impotent in the face of thuggish aggression. Clearly Russia is not afraid of idle threats or the searing tongue of the EU and UN. Realists, like those in the Kremlin, only heed the threat of force, something Barack Obama is opposed to using, even in the context of securing victory for his own nation. Obama willingly attempted to deny his nation the fruits of victory in Iraq for his own selfish ends. Can we trust this weak and foolish man to not only lead the United States but also the free world? Can Obamapolitik save the world from tyranny?
Men like Putin undoubtedly relish the thought of Barack Obama’s election. Never before (or at least since Jimmy Carter) has the most powerful nation on the planet, and incidentally the primary check against the aggressive tendencies of many a despot, been willing to surrender its power and leave the world to the wolves. To men like Putin, who apparently did not receive the memo on how the world has changed to a hopeful place, Obama is a green light for aggression. An Obama victory on November 4th would be the clarion call for all the world’s tyrants to strike. While Obama plans summits and sit-downs with Hugh Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Putin and others will be unleashing their well-planned campaigns of oppression. As Vladimir Putin so ably demonstrated this weekend, the great questions of the day, as well as the fates of entire peoples, are not decided by hope, change or Obamapolitik but by blood and iron.