Add to Technorati Favorites

Thursday, October 8, 2009

Obama's Olympics, Foreign Policy Views Naive

I swore I wasn't going to write about the Olympic blunder in Chicago until I received my Sunday Chicago Tribune on the 4th of October. I was sipping coffee and going through page after page of the front section of the paper and I didn't find any articles about health care, wars in Iran and Afghanistan, or the economy. I would estimate 95% of the front section of this major American paper was all about the loss of the Olympic bid Chicago put forward.
The only reason President Obama went to Copenhagen was to increase his political capital. It was a educated gamble. He thought the odds were in his favor when he made his plea to have the 2016 Olympics go to Chicago.
I'm not blaming President Obama for trying to bring the Olympics to Chicago but I am blaming him for the naive, wide-eyed expectations he had. This is very troubling because the administration runs their foreign policy in much the same way. Being a bit too naïve. Specifically trying to engage Iran among others on issues such as curtailing nuclear weaponry.
The International Olympic Committee no matter how they profess to be free of politics is basically an organization where politics dictate everything. Just having the best bid doesn't win. It's another way countries can snub the United States, much like the United Nations does.
How can you take the United Nations seriously when in the past they have had countries such as Syria, Libya, China and Saudi Arabia being on the United Nations Commission on Human Rights? I understand for political reasons you have to share the seats with countries with bad human rights records but that doesn't mean it's a legitimate Commission in dealing with serious issues. I mean what is Sudan going to say about human rights violations in Libya or vice versa?
The Olympics over the years have been plagued with cheating on both the players and officials sides.
While Obama took off to Copenhagen the question of sending more troops to Afghanistan was left answered. It is going into the middle of October and he is still undecided. I realize he needs time to make his decision but how long? A week? Two weeks? A month? He is surrounded by military and civilian advisers and I'm sure by now they have given him all the information he needs.
As he sits undecided Americans are being killed almost daily in Afghanistan. He fired the former commandeer and hand-picked his present one who requested more troops.
I don't think his indecisiveness is hurting troops now but what happens if he does decide to send more troops? It's going to take time to get his new plan in action. Whatever plan he decides on pursuing could have been started weeks ago and the worst part is Robert Gates, his defense secretary, announced it may still take weeks for Obama to decide thus delaying implementation of any plan he decides on.
Very soon this “aww, shucks let me think about it” attitude may start harming our troops.

No comments:

Post a Comment


Subscribe in a reader