American ambassador to the UN, Samantha Power, said yesterday that the USA would not conduct air strikes in Syria against ISIS until it had the cooperation of other countries. It was an amazing statement from an administration that has had more than its fair share of such statements in the last month. Indeed, it was yet another instance of a high administration official disagreeing and undermining the policy of president Obama. Think about it. Obama told the country in a televised speech that the goal is to degrade and destroy ISIS both in Syria and Iraq. Obama also committed America to using its air power to smash ISIS. Ambassador Power is pulling back on that commitment. In many ways, it reminds one of the "red line" regarding the use of chemical weapons in Syria that Obama first proclaimed and then ignored to the embarrassment of the USA.
In the weeks since Obama's speech there have been all manner of military and defense officials who have told the world that American troops might be used in the fight against ISIS despite Obama's assurances to the contrary. It was an unprecedented situation in which a huge part of the administration seemed intent on disagreeing with the president.
Power's statement comes from the other side. The statements about the use of troops coming from the Joint Chiefs and the Secretary of Defense seemed to push the country closer to full scale military combat. Power is pushing away from the use of force.
The problem, of course, is that all of these statements make the world (and America) wonder if anyone is actually in charge. How can Obama set policy if his own administration does not listen to him. We understand that senators and congressmen may have differing views as to how to proceed. That, indeed, is their job. The Executive branch, however, is expected to speak as one. In the past, there have been times when "leaks" from "high administration officials" have taken on the official policy. Such leaks were a sign that the president was losing control. I cannot recall, however, a time when there was such a level of open disagreement with the president by his own people.
Right now, ISIS is still on the march in Syria. It is presenting great targets in the massed troops that it has outside Ayn al Arab. It would be the perfect time for America to unleash its air power to smash ISIS forces. Instead, we are witnessing the public dithering of an administration that seems able to do only one thing well: to display incompetence.
In the weeks since Obama's speech there have been all manner of military and defense officials who have told the world that American troops might be used in the fight against ISIS despite Obama's assurances to the contrary. It was an unprecedented situation in which a huge part of the administration seemed intent on disagreeing with the president.
Power's statement comes from the other side. The statements about the use of troops coming from the Joint Chiefs and the Secretary of Defense seemed to push the country closer to full scale military combat. Power is pushing away from the use of force.
The problem, of course, is that all of these statements make the world (and America) wonder if anyone is actually in charge. How can Obama set policy if his own administration does not listen to him. We understand that senators and congressmen may have differing views as to how to proceed. That, indeed, is their job. The Executive branch, however, is expected to speak as one. In the past, there have been times when "leaks" from "high administration officials" have taken on the official policy. Such leaks were a sign that the president was losing control. I cannot recall, however, a time when there was such a level of open disagreement with the president by his own people.
Right now, ISIS is still on the march in Syria. It is presenting great targets in the massed troops that it has outside Ayn al Arab. It would be the perfect time for America to unleash its air power to smash ISIS forces. Instead, we are witnessing the public dithering of an administration that seems able to do only one thing well: to display incompetence.
No comments:
Post a Comment