Abu Muqawama: Post
Abu Muqawama retains its autonomy and the views and beliefs expressed within the blog do not reflect those of CNAS. Abu Muqawama retains the right to delete comments that include words that incite violence; are predatory, hateful, or intended to intimidate or harass; or degrade people on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, or disability. In summary, don't be a jerk.
Bad Call, Mr. President
A favorite Republican pastime is comparing Democratic presidents and presidential wannabes with Jimmy Carter, who, fairly or not, is remembered by many as having been both hapless in terms of foreign policy and weak toward the enemies of the United States.
Theoretically, that should be really difficult to do with President Obama. Most Americans have a tough time taking seriously those who would call "weak" the guy who a) gave the order to thwack Osama bin Laden, b) surged in Afghanistan, and c) successfully directed the air campaign that removed Qadhdhafi from power.
But now those Jimmy Carter comparisons are a lot easier to make in practice. In an eerie echo of Carter's decision to allow the embattled Shah of Iran to travel to the United States to undergo medical treatment, hastening the Islamic Revolution, President Obama has allowed the equally embattled leader of Yemen, Ali Abdullah Saleh, to do the same.
That sound you subsequently heard this evening was America's Yemen experts (all three of them!) banging their heads on their desks in frustration. What kind of message does it send to the people of Yemen and the greater region when the United States allows an abusive autocrat to take refuge in a New York hospital while his people demonstrate in support of democracy in the face of bullets from his security forces? Just whose side is the United States on in the Arab Spring? If Bashar al-Asad gets pancreatic cancer, should we expect for him to be treated at Johns Hopkins?
How, you might ask, did this golf foxtrot come to pass? An aforementioned strength of this administration -- its ruthless and successful campaign to decimate al-Qaeda and its affiliates -- is also a weakness in that it overshadows everything else and causes the administration to see entire regions of the globe through a CT-shaped soda straw. The United States does not have a Middle East policy or even a Yemen policy. It has a counterterrorism policy, and all things Yemen are viewed through that prism. It is telling that the lead administration official responsible for the decision to admit Saleh to the United States was not the Secretary of State but rather the president's chief counterterrorism advisor, John Brennan.
The Obama Administration is making the same mistakes many Gulf regimes are making: thinking, to paraphrase Toby Jones, that it can continue into 2012 with 2010's assumptions -- as if 2011 never happened. Does the Arab Spring matter or does it not? If it does not, the United States can continue its relationships with Gulf states dominated solely by issues related to counterterrorism and oil. If it does, though, the United States has to think more broadly -- both in terms of its bilateral relationships in the region as well as how what it does in one country will be seen elsewhere in the region.
I know the administration will say they have a plan to use this time Saleh is out of the country to shepherd him from power, to which I say the administration is being too clever by half. As Gregory Johnsen noted, the Saudis did not manage to keep Saleh in Saudi Arabia, so what hope do we have to keep Saleh here? And will any clever backroom negotiations to end Saleh's rule matter to millions who will not see beyond the United States offering refuge to a brutal dictator? The administration will also argue that it understands the comparison with the Shah and the attending risks -- but I think knowing and then ignoring the lessons of history is even worse than being ignorant of them to begin with.
I'll just conclude by noting that the administration has yet to name a successor to Colin Kahl at the Department of Defense, so as all of this takes place, the United States does not have anyone behind the wheel of U.S. defense policy in the region. Merry Christmas!
petermaercbs PETER MAER White
petermaercbs PETER MAER
White House strongly denies published reports that it has cleared embattled Yemini Pres Saleh to enter US for medical treatment.
I got this tweet 2hrs ago
Yo yo yo yo yo yo yo . . .
Yo yo yo yo yo yo yo . . . wait a second. I read the NYT article too. Wasn't the reason to clear Salah out of Yemen so he could not mess with internal Yemani politics. Khat will not save this man. John Hopkins will. And letting the dude clear out and get medical treatment--on a schedule with a small "entourage" --seems to be a good deal to get him out. He's changed his mind on just about every agreement he's made on resigning. Maybe the Obama team thought this would be a decent way to get him out of southern Arabia.
Sound off Muq. Is this logic unsound?
We can't be seen to throw all
We can't be seen to throw all our allies to a mob, now can we? The world is not DC -where former friends and sponsors are abandoned for the next and latest fashion. The World notices such things. We might have saved a lot of bloodshed in Libya and Syria if they were allowed to run. It's not as if they won't be replaced by something as bad or worse. As far as the lesson's of the Shah, this administration deserves credit for not temporizing and hmm hawing about asylum as Carter did. He actually is much stronger on FP then Jimmy Hapless.
However thanks for showing us the latest in DC Weathervane fashion, wait in DC it's always in fashion.
Don't be too quick DC for mob justice. As the American People see their ruin is nigh and their vote means naught, you may be facing a mob baying for blood yourselves.
One of the reasons we had
One of the reasons we had many successful transitions to democratic governments in the 80's and post Cold-War is for the most part the previous hard line regimes were allowed to surrender power without reprisal - which is all that is happening in Egypt and all that happened in Libya. Were there no reprisals, was this universal? No. But it was the general trend. What our trendy lefty friends and the Euro hypocrites at the ICC have wrought since give a Dictator is the strongest motive to fight to the death, and make no deals with the West. Look at Mubarak and Qaddafi. If you were Syria, Iran or North Korea would you make a deal? Of course not.
And of course Lefty dictators have yet to pay. Pol Pot died of natural causes, the Castro's need never fear the International Community.
I love that the ICC chooses all places Belgium, who committed one of the worst genocides in Africa's History. At 5 million worked to death a record tough to beat. Has the Royal House stood in the dock?
If Saleh comes to the US,
If Saleh comes to the US, can't he be served with service of process under the Alien Tort Act, like Karadzic was? http://www.uniset.ca/other/cs5/70F3d232.html
I think you're right that
I think you're right that U.S. policy in the region overemphasizes CT, but I wonder if that's really what's at work here. When I heard about Saleh (possibly) coming to the U.S., I immediately thought of Libya. Early in the arc of that crisis, there was a lot of talk about how to encourage Ghaddafi to walk away, possibly even to the U.S., in order to accelerate the transition to something new. When I heard the Yemen news, I assumed the administration was simply hoping to make happen with Saleh what it had failed to get from Ghaddafi. If that's right, then the main aim is to speed up regime change, probably in hopes of realizing gains in several areas, of which CT is only one. Democracy promotion, conflict resolution, and (not least) regional stabilization would be obvious others. You may be right that this tactic is too clever by half, but I don't see how it demonstrates a myopic focus on CT.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ne5eP0OAsTs Words are fun to use and Obama is the master.
a) gave the order to thwack Osama bin Laden, b) surged in Afghanistan, and c) successfully directed the air campaign that removed Qadhdhafi from power.
There is always a different perspective.
The US changed law and built an intelligence network that finally, after nine years located and killed a SINGLE individual, OBL (Hear the praise and Hoorahs in the background? That is the Billion dollar sound system that we built for the event!). Obama watched on a TV and if the event did not happen Americans would have been pissed for the trillions spent. I would be more impressed if the master-in-chief was on the helicopter bustin' caps and doing the John Wayne. All would not have happened if it were not for Obama's favorite whipping post, Bush Jr. Was the surge in Afghanistan successful? Is the US any closer to building a nation that can maintain itself without $2-3B in outside foreign aid each year for the next ten to twenty years? Libya was a NATO mission, the US flew the fuel tankers. CIA was in the background, it was the Libyans that did the heavy lifting (remember, Obama swore on the bible, "no boots"). Libya is only successful if it has a government. What I see is an entire country's weapons arsenal let loose in a very unstable part of the world by the very people that are about gun control in America (if that is not hypocrisy, moral high ground lost), mix in the Arab Spring and AQ. Obama finally has his US stimulus program in the form of US defense and intelligence spending, he created a problem to solve.
The Republicans have their own brand of Bravo Sierra with Charlie Foxtrot included. I am ready for America's future and that is NOT what we are doing right now.
Lot happened in the Carter administration. The Republicans are equal opportunity types, all Democrats are weak on FP. Carter for me was an honest President that could not get Washington to go his way (sound familiar?). Interest rates going double digit for mortgages and the Iran hostage problem really were just the cherry on his sundae.
If Clinton had taken care of OBL in his administration Bush would never have enabled the WOT. The WOT is the worse thing that can happen to American democracy and US deficit spending. Fear is the great laxative for Washington spending.
Really, the way that the US is fighting these wars, I am surprised that Obama does not take John Hopkins apart brick by brick and ship it to Yemen complete with staff and an American payroll to treat Saleh in place. You know, it is a humanitarian thing. Saleh already left his country for treatment in SArabia Yemen did not fall to pieces, it was already in pieces. Taking Saleh to the US for treatment would be the same. The real question is about timing and cause. If the ground situation in Yemen is bad enough that there will be a regime change if Saleh leaves, then that battle is already lost as was the case for the Shah of Iran. The only thing left is timing, Obama will own that regardless.
America just gets into the business of too many countries and we always get some on us in return. ( you know what happens when the Sierra hits the fan)
As for the Presidential race, the Republicans already have lots to work with. I really do not think that Obama's FP walks across water. Handing out free money is always popular. Pakistan is not looking too good. A long standing friendly country, Egypt is upside down. China is not being to much friendlier. Europe will do just about anything we want if we will finance their lifestyle. Not sure that is a winner. Not sure there is a lot of respect in those statements for a country that barrows so much from China.
Both the Republicans and Democrats have not learned anything other than they can get want they want if they scare the shit out of people. If fear does not work then entitlements always get'em to the polls. That is not the way to build a future. America is going out of business and we have everything and everything to lose.
It is the stuff that keeps Democracies from lasting more than a couple hundred years.
'CNAS retains the right to
'CNAS retains the right to delete comments that include words that incite violence; are predatory, hateful, or intended to intimidate or harass; or degrade people '
Well, that pretty well excludes the Feierstein, then... (US Ambassador to Yemen)
TO To Serve Man
TO To Serve Man ronpaul2012lol
Was Saleh even here. at
Was Saleh even here.
at least you got a few congrats for a article well done
In tangentially related news,
In tangentially related news, the TBBs we've put into power in Egypt have had the supreme court declare their virginity spot check program illegal: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-12-28/egypt-court-orders-end-to-virginit...
Also, the Copts are getting it good and hard: http://www.copts.com/english/?p=3016. Nothing new there-Romer, the Brit administrator of Egypt in the 19th century, explained that if the Brits hadn't taken over and crushed the populist Urabi rebellion, the outcome would have been a purge of Egypt (a multinational country at the time) of all the Jews and Greeks, followed by the Copts. We've been helping that process take place in slow motion for sixty years.
When our TBB friends whom we put into power in Libya and elsewhere institute their own military passerby fisting program and ethnically purify their dominions, are you gonna take some responsibility, Andrew? You were, after all, a cheerleader for the process.
Uh, who did we put in power
Uh, who did we put in power in Egypt?
Are you angry that they assaulted the female protesters? Or do you think that the military should have suppressed Tahrir Square to keep Mubarak in power? If that is the case, then you should be for the rape and punishment of peaceful protesters.
Oh, I'm sorry. In my
Oh, I'm sorry. In my universe, these guys:
(http://gulfnews.com/polopoly_fs/egypt-protest-1.754203!image/3300816235.jpg_gen/derivatives/box_475/3300816235.jpg)
put that infamous Jew Mubarak :
(http://www.seattlepi.com/mediaManager/?controllerName=image&action=get&i...)
out of power, using a combination of US backing
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/09/world/middleeast/09egypt.html?_r=1
and good old-fashioned Arab know-how:
http://www.arabianbusiness.com/incoming/article376961.ece/ALTERNATES/g3l...
The Army saw the writing on the wall, and joined in enthusiastically:
http://img.ibtimes.com/www/data/images/full/2011/09/30/167024-an-egyptia...
This all happened in my corner of the time-space continuum, you understand, so you might not have gotten the memo.
I am disgusted that the US, cheered on by guys like our host, supported the ousting of a chief semi-retard (who was smart enough to keep a lid on things for 30 years) in favor of a coalition of total retards, who are now (predictably) turning on each other and committing various outrages in the process. Apparently, this suits us well, since we've repeated the experiment in Libya and are now doing it again in Yemen. When the chickens come home to roost, don't let's be surprised.
Yeah, right. The militias and
Yeah, right. The militias and tribes in Yemen are demonstrating for democracy.
What a naive fool.
Why don't we have some more laments from Johnsen for us to actively shove out Salih, even though he doesn't have the slightest idea who's going to follow. Because, as Iran demonstrated, and Egypt and Libya are now demonstrating, that always works.
It's so much fun to be an arson when you won't pay any of the costs of putting out the fires.
Visitor on December 27, 2011
Visitor on December 27, 2011 - 10:07am
TO To Serve Man ronpaul2012lol
Have not really followed Paul other than he gets a lot of eggs tossed at him. Really do not think his views are broad and strong enough to pull Americans together.
Really, this is going to be another race where Americans go to the polls to pick the best of the worst who do not get it. America is completely brain dumb to let a few in government spend the wealth so freely outside of our shores with no real benefit to the people that borrow money from China to pay for their future. Obama is just making it worse.
Both parties serve American business, not the people. Serving only the people is wrong too. It should be about balance. America is divided if either political party wins America loses. America as a nation is more worried about nation building outside its borders than it is within our families at home. Our Universities were built for our children's future, they should have priority.
The problem is where our economic growth comes from. America keeps pushing outside its shores to maintain growth. The more America extends past our shores, outside influences have greater control on our national security. Energy is important to America and all the expansion of natural gas and the Canadian pipe line is not about the American continent, it is about selling energy to International markets (China). Yet Americans pay billions to pump oil into a national oil reserve. Americans are mismanaging our growth. America should manufacture what it needs at home.
The only influence that America has in the ME is through the governments in the ME, which is changing.
Change is not always good.
BTW....Proverb 22:7
The rich rule over the poor, and the borrower is slave to the lender.
If you do not like Corporate America getting into your business, then do not buy their junk (Do you stand in line to purchase iPhones? Poor you). Tell VISA to take a hike if you do not like your debit. Ask your Congressman to spend your money wisely. You created your own life.
Change starts at home and how much you borrow to meet your life style. How much gasoline do you use? Do you use it wisely? American consumers have the last word and they have no clue.
Ex - Nobody knows wtf you are
Ex -
Nobody knows wtf you are talking about until the last line of the 3rd paragraph. Otherwise, good post.
Exum you are such a
Exum you are such a dumbass.
This is part of our implicit "Searching for Ataturk" contract with all the dictators we propped.
grow up you WATB.
In an interview with CBC a
In an interview with CBC a few days back, the host asked me if the US should get involved in Egypt, and my response was that no country should get involved in the internal affairs in Egypt--be it Saudi, the Gulf States, the US, or any other country. Siding with one group of Egyptians against another group is totally wrong. The US should watch and assess unless something major happens, which then may call for approval or disapproval.
http://azzasedky.typepad.com/egypt/2011/12/an-open-letter-to-egyptian-is...
Add your comment