Paul
Ibrahim
Read Paul's bio and previous columns
July 21, 2008
Barack Obama’s Verbiage Demonstrates Insecurity with Global
Affairs
Having begun
campaigning for the presidency practically upon his election to federal
office, Barack Obama is running on a little more than his experience as
an Illinois state senator. Obama has barely spent any time in the U.S.
Senate, has developed no significant familiarity with diplomatic
processes or foreign policy, and unlike governors who have become
presidents, he has no executive experience to compensate for his
inability to understand international affairs or create cohesive teams
and policies to address them.
Global affairs thus
clearly represent a weak point for Obama. His most recent speech
addressing the War on Terror, in fact, appears to contain hints of his
insecurity on the subject. In an effort to show off his understanding of
geography and global nuances, Obama jam-packed his speech with excessive
yet pointless geographic references that added nothing substantively,
but were intended to give more legitimacy to his words by, well, adding
more words.
What follows are a few
examples, all coming from the War on Terror speech Obama made last week:
“From the cave-spotted mountains of northwest
Pakistan, to the centrifuges spinning beneath Iranian soil, we know that
the American people cannot be protected by oceans or the sheer might of
our military alone.”
Lee Greenwood does sing
“From the lakes of Minnesota, to the hills of Tennessee,” but Obama
might be forgetting that he is making a serious policy speech, not
singing to his adoring fans. References to “cave-spotted mountains” and
“Iranian soil” as opposed to just, say, Iran, are examples of
unnecessary verbosity. But it wouldn’t be that bad if it was Obama’s
only weird statement. He goes on:
“As president, I will pursue a
tough, smart and principled national security strategy – one that
recognizes that we have interests not just in Baghdad, but in Kandahar
and Karachi, in Tokyo and London, in Beijing and Berlin.”
So, in other words, we
have interests across the world. Or around the globe, if you will. Or
throughout Europe and Asia. Listing seven random cities, though intended
to convey Obama’s knowledge and intelligence, is mere filler for a
speech severely lacking substance. Serious policy speeches simply don’t
do that.
“Both America and Iraq will be more
secure when the terrorist in Anbar is taken out by the Iraqi Army, and
the criminal in Baghdad fears Iraqi Police, not just coalition forces.
Both America and Iraq will succeed when every Arab government has an
embassy open in Baghdad, and the child in Basra benefits from services
provided by Iraqi dinars, not American tax dollars.”
First of all, Barack,
if you want to list different locations in Iraq to show off your
familiarity with them, you shouldn’t talk about “the terrorist in
Anbar,” who has been cleaned out of Anbar thanks in part to the same
surge you opposed. Second, what’s with “the child in Basra?” Why
couldn’t the terrorist, the criminal, the embassies and the children all
be in Baghdad, where they are most likely to be? Why unnecessarily
double the length of that paragraph when it wastes precious seconds of
free media you could otherwise capitalize on?
“Al Qaeda has an expanding base in
Pakistan that is probably no farther from their old Afghan sanctuary
than a train ride from Washington to Philadelphia.”
Yes, it might look a
lot like it if you have a ruler and a map. It would be exactly the same
thing, in fact, if it weren’t for the lack of railroad tracks. And the
absence of a road with the smoothness and convenience of I-95. And the
existence of a terrain with a degree of difficulty that makes walking to
Philadelphia from Washington feel like going from one end of Obama’s
campaign bus to the other. And all the bearded guys with guns. But other
than that, the two places are pretty much the same.
“Just as we succeeded in the Cold War by
supporting allies who could sustain their own security, we must realize
that the 21st Century’s frontlines are not only on the field of battle –
they are found in the training exercise near Kabul, in the police
station in Kandahar, and in the rule of law in Herat.”
Oh, look at that, Obama
has now been caught using Kandahar in two different lists in the same
speech! He is starting to run out of cities. But again, there is no
reason the training exercise, the police station, and the rule of law
can’t all be in the same place. Even more to the point, “the rule of law
in Afghanistan” would have gotten the same exact message across.
As the presidential
nominee of one of America’s two major political parties, we trust that
Obama has someone on his staff who can pull up Afghani cities on
Wikipedia – there is no need to list them for the speech to be a solid
one.
“Now, we worry – most of all – about a rogue
state or nuclear scientist transferring the world's deadliest weapons to
the world's most dangerous people: terrorists who won’t think twice
about killing themselves and hundreds of thousands in Tel Aviv or
Moscow, in London or New York.”
This is one geographic
list that might have been somewhat acceptable had it not been
accompanied by the world’s every other geographic reference in the same
speech. But even so, it sheds light on some sort of strange fetish with
sounding cosmopolitan in some ways, as if the goal is to further attract
the coffee-shop types that are already inebriated by Obama anyway.
“We ship nearly $700 million a day
to unstable or hostile nations for their oil. It pays for terrorist
bombs going off from Baghdad to Beirut. It funds petro-diplomacy in
Caracas and radical madrasas from Karachi to Khartoum.”
And there we have it,
Karachi also makes its second appearance! And yet another long-winded
statement that could be condensed into something less poetic and more
worthy of a superpower’s foreign policy.
Compare Obama’s speech
with serious foreign policy speeches, old and new. Obama’s, in
comparison, will inevitably sound like a perverted version of Lee
Greenwood’s “God Bless the U.S.A.”
It is unfortunate, and
even somewhat worrying. If Obama wants to become president of the United
States, the least he can do is deliver serious and mature policy
speeches. The old retired woman in upstate New York’s tundra, the exotic
dancer on the beaches of Miami, and the children sweating in the heat of
Arizona’s playgrounds – you know, Americans – expect no less.
© 2008 North Star
Writers Group. May not be republished without permission.
Click here to talk to our writers and
editors about this column and others in our discussion forum.
To e-mail feedback
about this column,
click here. If you enjoy this writer's
work, please contact your local newspapers editors and ask them to carry
it.
This is Column # PI120.
Request
permission to publish here.
|