This week Barack Obama became who he is going to be for the next four years. Amid a flurry of crucial decisions on the economy and foreign policy, his presidency is showing what may be its ultimate shape--out of necessity daring on domestic issues, more conventional and cautious on foreign policy.
Liberals who criticized his response to the financial crisis as too careful, like Paul Krugman, were finally impressed: "If he can get anything like the plan he announced on Thursday through Congress, he will set America on a fundamentally new course...(F)ears that Mr. Obama would sacrifice progressive priorities in his budget plans, and satisfy himself with fiddling around the edges of the tax system, have now been banished."
Conservatives also noted a difference. "A mysterious thing happened in that speech Tuesday night," Peggy Noonan writes. "By the end of it Barack Obama had become president," pointing to a moment "about four-fifths of the way through the speech. He was looking from the prompters to the congressmen and senators, and suddenly he was engaging on what seemed a deeper level. His voice took on inflection. He wasn't detached, as if he was wondering how he was doing. He seemed equal to the moment and then, in some new way, in command of it."
There is also a new edge to his determination to confront "the special interests and lobbyists...gearing up for a fight," and the days of wooing Republicans rather than defeating them in Congress, at least on domestic issues, seem to be winding down.
But foreign policy is something else. The pace of withdrawal from Iraq is slow enough to satisfy John McCain, and the decision to send more troops into Afghanistan while announcing a "soup to nuts" rethinking of our mission there has a cart-before-the-horse Bushlike feel to it. Shouldn’t the strategy precede the deployment?
Special envoy Richard Holbrooke is barely back from a whirlwind visit to the region, and the nature of Pakistan's role in fighting the Taliban is still unclear. For Obama, who puts so much emphasis on diplomacy, the military commitment seems premature.
As an incoming President with more on his plate than any in half a century, Barack Obama is shaping up fast and well enough to maintain good poll ratings from a jittery public, but the road looks long and uphill for the months ahead.
Showing posts with label Afghanistan deployment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Afghanistan deployment. Show all posts
Saturday, February 28, 2009
Thursday, September 04, 2008
Is Petraeus a Lame Duck, Too?
Behind-the-scenes scuffling over the General's next appearance before Congress reflects a growing Pentagon rift over deployment of troops in the Middle East as well as resistance to being used for political purposes.
According to the Christian Science Monitor: "Days before the top US commander in Iraq gives his official assessment on troop levels there, a high-level move is afoot to keep Gen. David Petraeus out of the political spotlight. Many senior Pentagon officials want to shift public and lawmaker attention away from Iraq to Afghanistan...
"Members of Congress have requested that Petraeus make another appearance on Capitol Hill, sure to draw the kind of attention that a visit from the high-profile general engenders. The Defense Department has refused that request, ostensibly because of scheduling issues. But as the Pentagon struggles to muster more troops for Afghanistan, officials worry that the general's testimony on Iraq will upstage other needs."
The subtext of this maneuvering is growing Pentagon unease over the Bush Administration's unprecedented politicization of the military and the desire of top brass to dial back during the election campaign.
Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen told reporters last week, "We are an apolitical, neutral organization in this country, and we need to stay out of politics, those of us in uniform. And it is very tempting in this time because of where we are, and we just shouldn't do it."
As John McCain and Republican convention yahoos howl this week about victory in Iraq, under the radar there is movement toward Barack Obama's sanity in calling for troop withdrawal from Iraq to combat terrorists where they live, but military leaders seem to be doing their best not to get caught in that crossfire.
According to the Christian Science Monitor: "Days before the top US commander in Iraq gives his official assessment on troop levels there, a high-level move is afoot to keep Gen. David Petraeus out of the political spotlight. Many senior Pentagon officials want to shift public and lawmaker attention away from Iraq to Afghanistan...
"Members of Congress have requested that Petraeus make another appearance on Capitol Hill, sure to draw the kind of attention that a visit from the high-profile general engenders. The Defense Department has refused that request, ostensibly because of scheduling issues. But as the Pentagon struggles to muster more troops for Afghanistan, officials worry that the general's testimony on Iraq will upstage other needs."
The subtext of this maneuvering is growing Pentagon unease over the Bush Administration's unprecedented politicization of the military and the desire of top brass to dial back during the election campaign.
Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen told reporters last week, "We are an apolitical, neutral organization in this country, and we need to stay out of politics, those of us in uniform. And it is very tempting in this time because of where we are, and we just shouldn't do it."
As John McCain and Republican convention yahoos howl this week about victory in Iraq, under the radar there is movement toward Barack Obama's sanity in calling for troop withdrawal from Iraq to combat terrorists where they live, but military leaders seem to be doing their best not to get caught in that crossfire.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
