To Russia With Love
What to make of the recently leaked letter from President Obama to Russian leader, Medvedev, regarding a deal to back off deploying a missile defense system in Eastern Europe in return for Moscow's support in discouraging Iran from pursuing nuclear weapons and a long-range missile capability?
On the surface, it appears amateurish, and contrary to popular diplomatic wisdom. Why would a salvo be launched from the top without first doing the necessary groundwork to assure the desired response would be forthcoming? Protocol dictates that Obama underlings should have been dispatched first to secure an unequivocal commitment from Medvedev. Anything short of complete support by the Russian would typically be a signal to pull back so that the initiating party, Obama, would not be embarrassed. It is almost always a goal in such delicate circumstances to preserve plausible deniability. Clearly, that did not happen in this instance. The Russians have essentially balked, or at least expressed serious misgivings, and President Obama is left hung out to dry. Not only does he appear feckless, but he has potentially damaged relations with the Czechs and Poles, two of the primary beneficiaries of the proposed missile shield.
Is it that clear cut of a foreign policy blunder? Perhaps not; there are other possibilities. It is feasible that Obama was prepared for a no answer. He could have viewed the diplomatic attempt as a win/win situation. If Medvedev would have agreed, Obama scores an early and significant diplomatic victory, and establishes that he is, in fact, more capable than Bush in dealing with difficult foreign policy challenges—just as he claimed during the campaign. If the answer was no, as it appears to have been, then Obama has the necessary cover to move forward and deploy the shield in Eastern Europe, having demonstrated to the world that he made a good faith attempt to address Moscow's concerns.
There are at least a couple problems with the above thesis, though. One, it is very, very unclear that Obama wants to go forward with the missile shield. If he doesn't, his swing-for-the-fences letter is exposed as political naiveté. The potential fallout is that his stature on the international stage is diminished, and Medvedev/Putin are emboldened, not unlike Khrushchev was after his first interaction with President Kennedy.
The second problem, of course, is that Obama has already demonstrated a propensity for decisions of the ready, shoot, aim variety. So, I may be positing more sagacity than actually exists. Given his articulated inflated opinion of himself, coupled with his administration's clumsy handling of cabinet appointments, executive orders (e.g. Guantanamo), legislation formulation, bipartisanship promises, etc., it is fully possible that this was just a plain old gaffe born of gullibility, egotism, and overconfidence.
Shrewd or artless? It is simply too early to tell. We'll just have to see how the circumstances unfold.
On the surface, it appears amateurish, and contrary to popular diplomatic wisdom. Why would a salvo be launched from the top without first doing the necessary groundwork to assure the desired response would be forthcoming? Protocol dictates that Obama underlings should have been dispatched first to secure an unequivocal commitment from Medvedev. Anything short of complete support by the Russian would typically be a signal to pull back so that the initiating party, Obama, would not be embarrassed. It is almost always a goal in such delicate circumstances to preserve plausible deniability. Clearly, that did not happen in this instance. The Russians have essentially balked, or at least expressed serious misgivings, and President Obama is left hung out to dry. Not only does he appear feckless, but he has potentially damaged relations with the Czechs and Poles, two of the primary beneficiaries of the proposed missile shield.
Is it that clear cut of a foreign policy blunder? Perhaps not; there are other possibilities. It is feasible that Obama was prepared for a no answer. He could have viewed the diplomatic attempt as a win/win situation. If Medvedev would have agreed, Obama scores an early and significant diplomatic victory, and establishes that he is, in fact, more capable than Bush in dealing with difficult foreign policy challenges—just as he claimed during the campaign. If the answer was no, as it appears to have been, then Obama has the necessary cover to move forward and deploy the shield in Eastern Europe, having demonstrated to the world that he made a good faith attempt to address Moscow's concerns.
There are at least a couple problems with the above thesis, though. One, it is very, very unclear that Obama wants to go forward with the missile shield. If he doesn't, his swing-for-the-fences letter is exposed as political naiveté. The potential fallout is that his stature on the international stage is diminished, and Medvedev/Putin are emboldened, not unlike Khrushchev was after his first interaction with President Kennedy.
The second problem, of course, is that Obama has already demonstrated a propensity for decisions of the ready, shoot, aim variety. So, I may be positing more sagacity than actually exists. Given his articulated inflated opinion of himself, coupled with his administration's clumsy handling of cabinet appointments, executive orders (e.g. Guantanamo), legislation formulation, bipartisanship promises, etc., it is fully possible that this was just a plain old gaffe born of gullibility, egotism, and overconfidence.
Shrewd or artless? It is simply too early to tell. We'll just have to see how the circumstances unfold.
Good points. I have that the move was not "shrewdness" but "inexperience". You point out the other gaffes made by an inexperienced politician - cabinet appointments, executive orders not thought through ... This is someone who is learning protocol on the job.
Reply to this
Interesting thoughts, but I still do not see the logic in dealing with one country that is not trustworthy (Russia), to access another country that will never honor a deal (Iran). I'm shocked that the Russians did not jump at the idea. Russia could get us out of the former Easten Block countries, and when Iran shows up with a nuke, they could say "we tried". Obama would never re-deploy. It was a terrible play by an administration that is not only learning on the job, but is potentially unraveling the security we have built over many years.
Reply to this