America’s “New” Foreign Policy
Joltin’ Joe Biden previewed it in Germany yesterday:
As promised, Vice President Joe Biden reached out to the international community Saturday, saying the U.S. is open for talks with Iran and Russia to repair relations, and willing to work with allies to solve world problems.
But in his first major foreign policy speech for the new administration, the Democrat also warned that the U.S. stands ready to take pre-emptive action against Tehran if it does not abandon its nuclear ambitions and support for terrorism.
Repair relations? Just words at the moment.
Pre-emptive action? I thought we quit doing that stuff. OK, pre-emptive action. Also known as maintenance of the status quo policy. “We want to repair relations but reserve the right to pre-emptively attack Iran”.
Good luck with that.
And while he said it is time to mend fences with Moscow, he said the U.S. continues “to develop missile defenses to counter a growing Iranian capability, provided the technology is proven and it is cost-effective.”
Continue to develop missile defenses? Status quo – but again, with the caveat “we want to mend fences”.
Good luck with that.
The article notes that Biden was “short on details”. No particular surprise there. But apparently the “tone” was just music to the diplomats ears.
For instance:
“I think Vice President Biden came to Munich today in a spirit of partnership,” British Foreign Secretary David Miliband told AP Television News. “I think he set an ambitious agenda with big goals and high objectives, and he called and challenged us to work with him. I think that’s the right spirit.”
That hits me as diplo-speak for “he’s going to do things the way we want them done”. And, of course, that’s not leadership.
Understand too that diplomats are also going to give this a positive spin because they stand to gain from it. That’s why Russia said:
“The tonality was rather encouraging. It was really a serious call to restart U.S. foreign policy — including, clearly, Russian-American relations,” said Konstantin Kosachev, head of the international relations committee in Russia’s lower parliament house.
That’s diplo-speak for “we think we can roll these guys”.
What details Biden did give included the aforementioned continuation of the missile defense and this:
“It’s time to press the reset button and to revisit the many areas where we can and should be working together with Russia,” said Biden. Yet, he added that the U.S. will continue to have differences with Moscow, including opposition to its efforts to carve out independent states in Georgia.
Again, “just words” and status quo.
And to Europe, Biden said:
Biden, who also met privately with a number of world leaders, including top officials from Russia, France, and Germany, told allies that they will be expected to share the burdens of fighting extremists and bolstering weaker governments and poor nations.
“America will do more, that’s the good news,” said Biden. “But the bad news is America will ask for more from our partners.”
I’m not sure why asking more from our “partners” is “bad news” but it certainly reflects a continuation of the status quo.
Lastly, this:
On another topic, Biden told the leaders that the U.S. needs their help in taking the detainees now held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
He repeated Obama’s vow that the U.S. will adhere to its values, not torture, and will close the detention center at Guantanamo that has spurred such criticism from European allies.
Of course we’ve since learned that the Obama administration has reserved the right to approve more intensive interrogation techniques and, of course, you don’t need Guantanamo if you continue give the CIA permission to use rendition as a tool to deal with terrorists.
But apparently, to this point, that hasn’t really penetrated the good will that Obama still enjoys among the Euro types. Once the new wears off and they’re actually pushed to contribute “more” they’ll probably “discover” the duplicity of Biden’s words.
Hope and change.
~McQ













Reading this…..we’re totally boned aren’t we?
There’s very little chance Putin or Ahnedawhatever doesn’t roll Ocarter.
Well, no, not really.
The moment is declarative of several things ;
The relationships as he lists, were broken due to things we did.
Thereby that the current misadministration will use usual Liberal tactics to try and repair them. Specifically, the always ineffective/counter-effective Hind-lick maneuver.
The current crop of democrats hasn’t learned a thing one from the mistakes of their brethren who held those positions in the past.
We’re screwed.
Did he say… <em>Munich?!</em>
Never let it be said that this administration doesn’t pay attention to symbolism.Â
So Biden looked into Putin’s eyes and …
<i>[Obama's willingness to use rendition etc.] hasn’t really penetrated the good will that Obama still enjoys among the Euro types.</i>
Of course it hasn’t. They quietly cooperated with us for years on that stuff, remember? The only got upset when the media got ahold of it and made them look bad. They know damn well the world’s a rough place, and that without the US protecting them, they’re screwed. They’ll be hoping very hard right now that underneath the soothing noises, Obama’s just as evil as George was.Â
Where are people like Erb and Pogue.  I would love to hear their rationalizations for Obama’s continuance of the policies that they railed against in the campaign. Gitmo will be open for another year, the DOJ successfully asked the DC Circuit to stay the pending habeus corpus, 15 or so lobbyists are in major cabinet and White House positions, Obama will continue extraordinary rendition, he will continue enhanced interrogation techniques, his deficit spending on total cr** dwarfs what Bush spent, etc., etc. Now Biden threatens pre-emptive war and says we will continue anti-missile defense development.
However, I’m much more interested in hearing how Erb, Captain Sarcastic, Pogue and other, average Democrats justify their support for Obama when he is doing so many of the things that they criticized Bush for doing. We all knew that Democrats were playing politics and now the evidence is there to prove it. I have less of a problem with Obama being a liar than I do with my fellow citizens being so full of sh**. Democrats are liars. They hated George Bush because he was a Republican and they feel entitled to have Democrats running the government.  They cloaked their hatred in the pretext of principle. They weren’t against pre-emptive war when Clinton attacked Serbia, then they were against pre-emptive war when Bush (with the authorization of Congress) attacked Iraq, now they are at least in favor of threatening pre-emptive war against Iran.  I live in California so maybe what I’m experiencing is worse than other parts of the country, but I really believe we are in the midst of events that will irrevocably change all of our lives for the worse. Bush definitely deserves some of the blame because he failed in leadership on these economic issues. But Democrats deserve even more blame because it was mostly their policies that he caved in to.Â
Yeah well they are always right no matter how wrong they are. Â It is part of being a leftist, being able to hold multiple contradictory thoughts at once (massive cognitive dissonance).
Another fine example of Obama/Biden/Hiliary Foreign Policy at it’s best.
Wow, so cynical McQ! I think Obama recognizes that the US is in position to “lead” in terms of saying “do it our way,” but that we can build cooperative ventures to solve problems.  This is pragmatic foreign policy; we don’t change everything to please everyone because we have interests that transcend administrations. However, we try to work with states and recognize that cooperation is more effective than conflict. You gotta admit, Bush was not very effective, especially in his first term, as he generally pushed the world away and then learned that the US was not strong enough to do that and get away with it. Bush did start changing his tone in his second Administration (for which I have given him credit), but Obama is finally charting a path that recognizes that the US is not some kind of unipolar hyperpower that has the capacity to shape the world or “lead” it. In military terms, Iraq and Afghanistan have taught us humility. And now we’re learning humility about our economy. We’re becoming more realistic, and Obama’s pragmatism is very, very promising.
Bush pushed the rest of the world away in his first term? Like he pushed them away into a coalition of 50 countries in the war in Afghanistan? Or the coalition of 40 countries fighting in Iraq?
That’s some pushing away.
“The tonality was rather encouraging…”
Ah, now I see. It ‘s not what you say, it’s how you say it.
And now a ‘good news-bad news’ thing;
The bad news is that there is another flatulent emission from Erb.
The good news is that it is so insubstantial that it is relatively inoffensive.
Thanks for providing so aptly the case ijn point my comment lacked, Scott. At the very least, you can be counted upon to provide a bad example.
“So Biden looked into Putin’s eyes and…”
Wrong end.
the big pucker up
Steverino, if you’re denying that the Bush ‘with us or against us’ not only failed, but was changed by Bush himself when it was clear by 2005 it failed, then you’re really out of it.  Your numbers are not only off, but for Iraq they were tiny countries with minimal support which didn’t last.
Erb, Bush didn’t say “with us or against us”, the actual quote was “You are either with us or with the terrorists.”Â
My numbers are not off, Erb. Here’s the list of countries involved on our side in Operation Enduring Freedom:
1Â Armenia
2Â Australia
3Â Bahrain
4Â Bangladesh
5Â Belgium
6Â Canada
7Â Congo
8Â Cyprus
9Â Czech Republic
10Â Denmark
11Â Egypt
12Â Estonia
13Â France
14Â Germany
15Â Greece
16Â Hungary
17Â India
18Â Italy
19Â Japan
20Â Jordan
21Â Kuwait
22Â Kyrgyzstan
23Â Latvia
24Â Lithuania
25Â Macedonia
26Â Malaysia
27Â Netherlands
28Â New Zealand
29Â Norway
30Â Oman
31Â Pakistan
32Â Poland
33Â Portugal
34Â Qatar
35Â Romania
36Â Russia
37Â Slovakia
38Â South Korea
39Â Spain
40Â Sudan
41Â Sweden
42Â Tajikistan
43Â Thailand
44Â Turkey
45Â Turkmenistan
46Â United Arab Emirates
47Â Ukraine
48Â United Kingdom
49Â United States
50Â Uzbekistan
That’s 50, Erb. So my number wasn’t off on that one.
Here are the countried involved on our side in Iraq:
 1. United States
 2. United Kingdom
 3. Australia
 4. Romania
 5. El Salvador
 6. Estonia
 7. Bulgaria
 8. Moldova
 9. Albania
10. Ukraine
11. Denmark
12. Czech Republic
13. South Korea
14. Japan
15. Tonga
16. Azerbaijan
17. Singapore
18. Bosnia & Herzegovina
19. Macedonia
20. Latvia
21. Poland
22. Kazakhstan
23. Armenia
24. Mongolia
25. Georgia
26. Slovakia
27. Lithuania
28. Italy
29. Norway
30. Hungary
31. Netherlands
32. Portugal
33. New Zealand
34. Thailand
35. Philippines
36. Honduras
37. Dominican Republic
38. Spain
39. Nicaragua
40. Iceland
Â
40 of them.
You can apologize for your error any time.
Clearly, not all of these countries are tiny. Some of them quite large. And an ally is an ally, Erb.
For Afghanistan you’re padding your list with countries that simply allow us to use their airspace or give some logistical support. That really isn’t what’s meant (nor does it deny that the Bush administration severely damaged US prestige, US military readiness, US strength or the US economy, leading to the current steep national decline that Obama is trying to halt).
Not sure where you’re getting your list on Iraq, but this supports my point:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iraq_orbat_coalition.htm
Of over thirty original supporters, a huge number left in 2004 when it became clear the US didn’t know what it was doing. Of those that remained by 2007, many had less than 100 people, token forces not really supporting the US.  And, of course, the countries were/are, as I noted, small and often being paid off by the US.  The fact is, US credibility has been damaged by the fiasco in Iraq, something nobody can seriously deny.  US military capacity has been stretched to the breaking point, and that has weakened the country just as we’re starting to go into steep decline.
Don’t say you weren’t warned and America’s decline — you were.
Logistical support is still part of the coalition, nimrod.
And the list is a list of countries that had actual troops stationed in Iraq.
I knew you wouldn’t admit your error. But everyone else here knows you just got pwn3d.
The point that Erb keeps dodging is that Bush was able to forge two fairly broad coalitions. That’s not the effect of someone who “pushes countries away”.
Let’s also remember that much of Africa was very pleased with Bush because of what he did for AIDS on that continent.
There were plenty of foreign policy successes under Bush.
As usual, the real world has nothing to do with the world in Erb’s mind.