Commentary Magazine


Topic: Suha Arafat

When Does the Realism Kick In?

Many others have noted the drivel emanating from our secretary of state — the platitudinous phrases, the double talk, and the insulation from reality. But it is also correct that we should not be surprised any longer:

In a way, you can’t blame her for her haplessness, secretarially speaking. Her own experience with matters foreign—being “shot at” by Bosnian “snipers,” for one, or, for another, kissing Suha Arafat while Mrs. Arafat’s blood-soaked husband was shoveling the untold millions he’d stolen from his miserable flock into Swiss bank accounts—has been somewhat . . . insubstantial. And in any case, she’s not exactly in charge. The Obamic foreign policy, such as it is, seems to be being formulated and conducted as much (maybe more?) from the West Wing as from Foggy Bottom, and by people even less familiar with the issues than she, who’ve done almost nothing in their lives but run political campaigns—and that’s in Chicago, where a little cold hard cash and some cold stiff bodies voting at graveyard polling stations can get anyone elected—and who are still in essence running a campaign today, though they call it a presidency.

She has declared that “ideology is so yesterday.” But so too is a sense of realism — yes, a true sense of who it is we face in the world, what motivates friends and foes, and what experience has taught us. No wonder the Obami are always “surprised” or “deeply disappointed” or “puzzled.” If you have historical amnesia, every day is a new one, and rebuffs, defeats, and dead ends come as surprises, disappointments, and puzzles.

The Obami, of course, dug themselves a deep hole by repudiating, or trying to repudiate, everything the Bush administration had tried. If the Bush team cultivated a close and productive relationship with Israel, they’d take a different tact. If the Bush administration forged bonds with Eastern Europe and extended our missile defense program, by gosh the Obami wouldn’t have any of that. If George W. Bush spoke movingly about human rights and met with dissidents, the Obami wouldn’t go there. It’s hard to be both reflexively rejectionist and ideology-free, isn’t it?

But the fault surely resides in the West Wing. Obama is a prisoner of so much ideology, it’s hard to keep track. There’s his blind faith in multilateralism. There’s his infatuation with the Left’s notion that an American groveling deficiency is at the root of “misunderstandings” with the “Muslim World.” And let’s not forget the “if we disarm, surely the despotic regimes will” hooey.

Dispensing of this or that hapless adviser might improve matters at the margins. It would be nice to think that we have one administration figure who doesn’t appear foolish when encountering a real interviewer (e.g., Chris Wallace, Candy Crowley). But ultimately, there’s no substitute for a wise, savvy, and resolute president. Until we get one of those, it’s going to be a bumpy ride.

Many others have noted the drivel emanating from our secretary of state — the platitudinous phrases, the double talk, and the insulation from reality. But it is also correct that we should not be surprised any longer:

In a way, you can’t blame her for her haplessness, secretarially speaking. Her own experience with matters foreign—being “shot at” by Bosnian “snipers,” for one, or, for another, kissing Suha Arafat while Mrs. Arafat’s blood-soaked husband was shoveling the untold millions he’d stolen from his miserable flock into Swiss bank accounts—has been somewhat . . . insubstantial. And in any case, she’s not exactly in charge. The Obamic foreign policy, such as it is, seems to be being formulated and conducted as much (maybe more?) from the West Wing as from Foggy Bottom, and by people even less familiar with the issues than she, who’ve done almost nothing in their lives but run political campaigns—and that’s in Chicago, where a little cold hard cash and some cold stiff bodies voting at graveyard polling stations can get anyone elected—and who are still in essence running a campaign today, though they call it a presidency.

She has declared that “ideology is so yesterday.” But so too is a sense of realism — yes, a true sense of who it is we face in the world, what motivates friends and foes, and what experience has taught us. No wonder the Obami are always “surprised” or “deeply disappointed” or “puzzled.” If you have historical amnesia, every day is a new one, and rebuffs, defeats, and dead ends come as surprises, disappointments, and puzzles.

The Obami, of course, dug themselves a deep hole by repudiating, or trying to repudiate, everything the Bush administration had tried. If the Bush team cultivated a close and productive relationship with Israel, they’d take a different tact. If the Bush administration forged bonds with Eastern Europe and extended our missile defense program, by gosh the Obami wouldn’t have any of that. If George W. Bush spoke movingly about human rights and met with dissidents, the Obami wouldn’t go there. It’s hard to be both reflexively rejectionist and ideology-free, isn’t it?

But the fault surely resides in the West Wing. Obama is a prisoner of so much ideology, it’s hard to keep track. There’s his blind faith in multilateralism. There’s his infatuation with the Left’s notion that an American groveling deficiency is at the root of “misunderstandings” with the “Muslim World.” And let’s not forget the “if we disarm, surely the despotic regimes will” hooey.

Dispensing of this or that hapless adviser might improve matters at the margins. It would be nice to think that we have one administration figure who doesn’t appear foolish when encountering a real interviewer (e.g., Chris Wallace, Candy Crowley). But ultimately, there’s no substitute for a wise, savvy, and resolute president. Until we get one of those, it’s going to be a bumpy ride.

Read Less

Kisses, Bows, and Hugs

Hillary Clinton’s kissing Suha Arafat. Not a good idea. Barack Obama’s bows. Rather cringe-inducing. (Clintons know that presidents shouldn’t bow.) And there is Charlie Crist’s hug:

It was in the glow of a new day in politics last February when Mr. Crist, this state’s popular Republican governor, took the stage with President Obama and declared that Republicans and Democrats had to rise above partisanship in support of an economic stimulus. And Mr. Obama embraced him.

Oops. Crist has a primary fight against the charismatic, conservative Marco Rubio, who has made opposition to Obamaism the cornerstone of his message. And that is a popular theme these days with the Republican base. They are in no mood to embrace, figuratively or otherwise, Obama. And the stimulus that caught Crist’s fancy is widely regarded, even outside the conservative base, as a bust.

Belatedly, Washington Republicans have gotten the message. Once racing to endorse Crist, the Republican Senate Campaign Committee is now in full retreat (“hounded by conservative bloggers, Mr. [John] Cornyn announced this month that he did not plan to spend any money in the primary”).

What is Rubio offering? “He argues for small government and reduced spending, but mostly, he talks about the need to stop what he calls the Obama agenda. ‘The bottom line is that if you’re a Republican, the Republican Party should be an alternative, not a facsimile,’ he said in an interview. ‘And I think I offer that.’” No hugs there.

Think of it this way: Crist has taken the Lindsay Graham approach; Rubio, the Bob McDonnell approach. If next year the Republican electorate is in a mood to accommodate Obamaism, Crist will cruise. If not, he’s in trouble. Yeah, I think so too.

Hillary Clinton’s kissing Suha Arafat. Not a good idea. Barack Obama’s bows. Rather cringe-inducing. (Clintons know that presidents shouldn’t bow.) And there is Charlie Crist’s hug:

It was in the glow of a new day in politics last February when Mr. Crist, this state’s popular Republican governor, took the stage with President Obama and declared that Republicans and Democrats had to rise above partisanship in support of an economic stimulus. And Mr. Obama embraced him.

Oops. Crist has a primary fight against the charismatic, conservative Marco Rubio, who has made opposition to Obamaism the cornerstone of his message. And that is a popular theme these days with the Republican base. They are in no mood to embrace, figuratively or otherwise, Obama. And the stimulus that caught Crist’s fancy is widely regarded, even outside the conservative base, as a bust.

Belatedly, Washington Republicans have gotten the message. Once racing to endorse Crist, the Republican Senate Campaign Committee is now in full retreat (“hounded by conservative bloggers, Mr. [John] Cornyn announced this month that he did not plan to spend any money in the primary”).

What is Rubio offering? “He argues for small government and reduced spending, but mostly, he talks about the need to stop what he calls the Obama agenda. ‘The bottom line is that if you’re a Republican, the Republican Party should be an alternative, not a facsimile,’ he said in an interview. ‘And I think I offer that.’” No hugs there.

Think of it this way: Crist has taken the Lindsay Graham approach; Rubio, the Bob McDonnell approach. If next year the Republican electorate is in a mood to accommodate Obamaism, Crist will cruise. If not, he’s in trouble. Yeah, I think so too.

Read Less




Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor to our site, you are allowed 8 free articles this month.
This is your first of 8 free articles.

If you are already a digital subscriber, log in here »

Print subscriber? For free access to the website and iPad, register here »

To subscribe, click here to see our subscription offers »

Please note this is an advertisement skip this ad
Clearly, you have a passion for ideas.
Subscribe today for unlimited digital access to the publication that shapes the minds of the people who shape our world.
Get for just
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor, you are allowed 8 free articles.
This is your first article.
You have read of 8 free articles this month.
YOU HAVE READ 8 OF 8
FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
for full access to
CommentaryMagazine.com
INCLUDES FULL ACCESS TO:
Digital subscriber?
Print subscriber? Get free access »
Call to subscribe: 1-800-829-6270
You can also subscribe
on your computer at
CommentaryMagazine.com.
LOG IN WITH YOUR
COMMENTARY MAGAZINE ID
Don't have a CommentaryMagazine.com log in?
CREATE A COMMENTARY
LOG IN ID
Enter you email address and password below. A confirmation email will be sent to the email address that you provide.