The courage of his convictions

It’s a study in contrasts.

Two months ago in the Oval Office, President George W. Bush, coming to the end of a two-term presidency and presumably as expert on Israeli-Palestinian policy as he is ever going to be, was accompanied by a team of no fewer than five advisers and spokespeople during a 40-minute interview with this writer and three other Israeli journalists.

In March, on his whirlwind visit to Israel, Republican presidential nominee John McCain, one of whose primary strengths is said to be his intimate grasp of foreign affairs, chose to bring along Sen. Joe Lieberman to the interview our diplomatic correspondent Herb Keinon and I conducted with him, looked to Lieberman several times for reassurance on his answers and seemed a little flummoxed by a question relating to the nuances of settlement construction. (emphasis added)

On Wednesday evening, toward the end of his packed one-day visit here, Barack Obama, the Democratic senator who is leading the race for the White House and who lacks long years of foreign policy involvement, spoke to The Jerusalem Post with only a single aide in his King David Hotel room, and that aide’s sole contribution to the conversation was to suggest that the candidate and I switch seats so that our photographer would get better lighting for his pictures.

Indeed, the Jerusalem Post added that this may have been Obama’s second trip to Israel, but he “knew precisely what he wanted to say about the most intricate issues confronting and concerning Israel, and expressed himself clearly, even stridently on key subjects.”

He didn’t even need Lieberman there to help him struggle through the interview.

I’m curious. If you’d just arrived from another planet, and didn’t know a thing about either candidate, who would you say is the self-described expert on foreign policy and who would you say is relatively inexperienced on matters of international affairs?

As for what he had to say to the Jerusalem Post, this was probably the most important substantive portion of the interview:

Post: Can you assure the people of Israel, and beyond, that as president you will prevent Iran attaining nuclear weapons?

Obama: What I can do is assure that I will do everything in my power as president to prevent Iran attaining nuclear weapons. And I think that begins with engaging in tough, direct talks with Iran, sending a clear message to Iran that they shouldn’t wait for the next administration but should start engaging in the P5 process [involving the five permanent members of the UN Security Council] that’s taking place right now, and elevating this to the top of our national security priorities, so that we are mobilizing the entire international community, including Russia and China, on this issue.

One of the failures, I think, of our approach in the past has been to use a lot of strong rhetoric but not follow through with the kinds of both carrots and sticks that might change the calculus of the Iranian regime. But I have also said that I would not take any options off the table, including military.

Post: How do you address the concern that the Iranians, even in the “tough negotiations” that you envisage, will play you for time while moving towards a nuclear capability? Ahmadinejad said today, “We’re not pulling back… not one iota.” They are very adamant.

Obama: I think it is important in mobilizing the international community to make clear that this is not just a game that we’re playing, but this is of the utmost seriousness – to send messages to Russia and China that in our bilateral relationships this is a top priority, not just a secondary priority. And one of my strong beliefs is that, to the extent that we are showing a willingness to negotiate but are very clear and direct in our goals, and are displaying a sense of urgency – that if the Iranians fail to respond, we’ve stripped away whatever excuses they may have, [and] whatever rationales may exist in the international community for not ratcheting up sanctions and taking serious action.

Knowing all the answers makes Obama an elitist. Just as being popular makes him a cult leader.

  • So I guess that makes him and elitist cult leader? Or a cult leader for elitists? Or just an elite cult leader?

  • That’s right: you’ve got to be dumb, fumbly and stupid to have that homely, one-of-us appeal.

  • He didn’t say anything about regime change or blowing people up. Senator Obama doesn’t see that our opponents in the ME are a monolithic group, all with the same agenda, and that it’s us against them. Anyone who sees nuance, religious, or political differences is unlikely to just go in and dump ordnance on the whole lot of them. That’s an obvious fail to pass the Commander in Chief threshold.

  • CB: …if the Iranians fail to respond, we’ve stripped away whatever excuses they may have, [and] whatever rationales may exist in the international community for not ratcheting up sanctions and taking serious action….

    That pretty much sums it up. the dumb Republican ideology is allowing the Iranians to use excuses -whether they are valid or not – but Obama is making sure that there aren’t any excuses left…. Now what?

    Neo-cons couldn’t possibly fathom what that would entail. Republican plan: Stale mate, maintain the status quo, while enriching the few in the process.

  • I’m proud to be an American, where educated means elitist, mediocrity equals trustworthy, and leaders are chosen by how much we’d like to have a beer with the candidates.

    If the debates don’t result in at least a 60-40 split for Obama among likely voters, we’re lost, because America will have become too stupid to be worth preserving.

  • There is one particular problem with both McCain’s and Obama’s policies towards Iran.

    The Iranians might not actually be trying to make a nuclear bomb.

    I know their saying they are not isn’t much proof, but considering that the whole world is practically falling at their feet begging them to stop gets me wondering if they are just playing this for yuks.

  • The courage of his convictions
    FISA? NAFTA? No ‘options’ off the table in Iran? Up the stakes in Afghanistan? Not bothering to view the actual situation on the ground in the Occupied Territories?

  • 7.
    On July 27th, 2008 at 1:44 pm, slappy magoo said:

    “If the debates don’t result in at least a 60-40 split for Obama among likely voters, we’re lost, because America will have become too stupid to be worth preserving.”

    Pretty sad when you have to beg people to give the smart, well informed and honest guy a chance so the country doesn’t swirl down the crapper.

    And pretty sad when they search their souls and study the clouds and ponder the hole in the dirt they just dug with the toe of their worn out shoe while thinking really, really, really hard and then come to the conclusion that no, they just don’t think it would be the best thing for their country to elect the smart, well informed and honest guy.

    I don’t see the 60/40 split coming slappy and I think it means just what you think it means.

  • I’ve been seeing a lot of wingnut types repeating the refrain that Obama is “arrogant.”

    Translation: they mean “uppity.”

  • Two things:

    1. There is a strong tendency, among those in this country, to denigrate and fear people more educated, more intelligent, or more capable than themselves. These people are one of the GOP’s most important constituents. These are the folks that voted for Reagan, voted for George Bush (and would vote for him today), and will cheerfully vote for John McCain, because they see him as too stupid to be a threat. If you doubt this assertion, simply look at Congress and try to tell me it isn’t so, especially in the GOP.

    2. The Iranian leadership knows that the big problem in developing nuclear weapons is having a source of fissionable material. Solve that, and you can develop a nuclear weapon in a few months. To obtain sufficient Plutonium is an enterprise requiring a breeder reactor and a reprocessing plant, both of which will be difficult to disguise, large, and relatively vulnerable to air attack or sabotage, and without peaceful use. Also, Plutonium bombs require a more sophisticated design. A Uranium-235 bomb, on the other hand, is simpler to build, and a processing plant for producing a sufficient quantity can be more easily hidden, protected — and, depending on the enrichment achieved, U-235 can be reactor fuel. Thus, by developing enrichment for “peaceful purposes”, the Iranians create an infrastructure by which, with relatively little tweaking, they can also produce bomb-grade material and build a bomb in a relatively short time, all without having to admit that that was their purpose all along.

    These two seemingly unrelated items are actually closely related, as, if we had leadership intelligent enough to understand and explain the issues in item 2 with sufficient clarity and force, Iran would be hard-pressed to get away with it. Unfortunately, we have leadership which has no credibility even within the USA. Thanks, low-information voters.

  • Charles @12:

    There is a strong tendency, among those in this country, to denigrate and fear people more educated, more intelligent, or more capable than themselves. These people are one of the GOP’s most important constituents.

    No kidding. I work with military officers in an intelligence planning department. The other day I overheard one say to the other, “We don’t need those coffee-drinking liberal academics in their universities telling us how to do things. What do they know?” Remember, this was a college graduate, a U.S. military officer, in a position of authority planning intelligence operations. A supposed smart guy was making that statement. More than a little scary, when you think about it.

    Those same liberal academics in their universities were on their way over to discuss the applied physics of improved computer networks and C4ISR systems. I’d say they know quite a bit. As for the coffee drinking remark, I’m just lost. I thought coffee (imported from Caribbean plantations) became a statement of American patriotism when we all boycotted King George’s tea a few years back, but then I’m just a liberal academic, so what do I know?

    The only thing that’s ever made me ashamed to be an American is our cultural embrace of stupidity, incompetence, and willful, wanton ignorance.

  • All along Iran has stated they are trying to make nuclear power not weapons. They are surrounded by countries who all have nukes. Even when WMDs were used against them in the Iran-Iraq war they refused to retaliate with WMD’s stating their belief that it was a sin against humanity.

    Israel wants to remain the dominate force in the area preventing Iran from ever having weapons equal to theirs. The whole area should be talking about getting rid of nukes as well as not making them. Who can blame Iran for wanting to be able to defend themselves. Still it is the leaders and not the people of both countries who ratchet up the fear to gain power. Iran would not be a threat to the US even with nukes.

    They have been singled out as the terrorists state trying to commit mass suicide by those who would take away our own freedoms claiming it necessary for our security.
    Iran using a nuke would be tantamount to suicide for their country and based on their won history of being against the use of WMD there really is no reason to be so threatening toward them.

    By making Iran part of the process of peace and economic development we begin to reverse the fear based attitudes of all concerned. It is time for a change…not more of the same policies that pushes the world into a corner. Even North Korea has come around to thinking food and economic prosperity trumps a weapons program. McCain’s/Bush’s bat in hand vs Obama’s food and tractor in hand. We don’t need military or corporate fear and profit domination…we need the exploitation of common ground politics.

    Experience teaches that reputations develop on lies as well as truths…on mistakes as well as successes. CB commenter once said McCain had one bad year he’s repeated 39 times. That’s experience with a reputation. McCain—wrong on everything.

  • I for one, am quite pleased to have a candidate for President who is articulate and can deliver a speech using words of more than one syllable and with complex sentence structure. When did education become a bad thing?

  • Keori @12. No its not surprising that a supposed “smart guy” was making that statement. After all, the greatest virtue of the military life is to follow orders blindly and accept what you are told without question.

  • Observant, I never said it was surprising, just scary. The ignorant twaddle those people spew doesn’t surprise me anymore. All I hear day in and day out is ugly right-wing lies.

    I do have to disagree with you on your second statement. In combat arms, yes, it is true that to follow orders without question is a virtue. Second-guessing something your superiors tell you while under fire usually leads to unpleasant things like death. They have the experience to make the split-second decisions that will keep people alive. In military intelligence, however, the greatest virtue is to have a discerning mind, be able to separate truth from fiction, and make that data actionable for the benefit of troops on the ground/in the air/on or under the water. Unfortunately, as our good ol’ Utah National Guardsman has so aptly demonstrated, the virtue of being smart in MI has gone the way of the dodo in the last 8 years. (I’m sure it doesn’t help when you’ve got Dick Cheney over your shoulder pointing at the computer screen and saying, “You see that WMD right there, don’t you? WELL, DON’T YOU???”)

  • Do you remember the old Laugh In line ” military intelligence is an oxymoron”?
    Wonder if Abe Lincoln or FDR could be elected as President in today’s America where intelligence is seen as a negative. And FDR never even served in the military and was in a wheel chair, for god’s sakes. What could people have been thinking back in those by-gone days?

  • Keori @18, Its very sad that the military mindset actively discourages critical thinking.

  • I think that many, many people who know a great deal about the issues are never invited into conversations at all. I cannot wait for the Metagovernment to change all that.

  • The Israelis illegally developed their nuclear arsenal because they were confronted by enemies of much greater military power. Now that they have the upper hand, they want all their neighbors’ hands tied. Only the far-right-wing morons believe that if Iran got a nuclear capability they would use it against their enemy Israel, which would immediately destroy Iran with hundreds of high-grade nukes, fired from several angles, including submarines, aircraft, and land. The Iranians aren’t suicidal, if they were they’d have shot biological or chemical weapons at Israel a long time ago. What the Iranians want is a deterrent, and we would too if we were in their shoes. But The Lobby says that’s crazy talk, and The Lobby uses its own brand of nukes on any politician who crosses that line. I’m glad Obama is saying the things he does, but I hope he’s preparing to put The Lobby back in the box it belongs in.

  • Comments are closed.