President Obama’s foreign policy is a shambles. Iran is cheating on development of nuclear weapons, N. Korea is devising another way to manufacture them, Syria continues arming Hizbullah, NATO won’t send more troops to Afghanistan, Poland and the Czech Republic are shocked at Obama’s withdrawal of the offer of anti-missile defense, and Russia acts as a spoiler but nevertheless complains that the U.S. is being difficult. Obama’s appeasement is met with contempt.
As a result of these problems, the neo-conservatives are being heard more. One of them is Bret Stephens. He described some of the neo-con theories.
Neo-cons extrapolate that rogue states’ domestic oppression would be mirrored by their foreign policies. Neo-cons expect rogue states to cheat on treaties. They do not believe that Russia or Syria will be persuaded to change. Hence, neo-cons do not expect much from the deals by Obama with such states.
“Governments that are answerable to their own people and accountable to a rule of law tend to respect the rights of their neighbors, honor their treaty commitments, and abide by the international rules of the road. By contrast, regimes that prey on their own citizens are likely to prey on their neighbors as well. Their word is the opposite of their bond.”
Neo-cons depend on U.S. moral, political, and military strength. They cite the Philippines, and Iraq as impelled to democratize by U.S. moral force. [There are other and some better examples.] When the U.S. stands up to dictators on human rights, their people get some relief. When the U.S. falters, the dictators become more oppressive. Dictators do not disarm voluntarily. Libya dropped nuclear weapons development when the U.S. dispatched a huge force to Iraq.
Neo-cons erred in over-estimating how long Americans could stay the course and in how much foreigners would fight for their own liberty.
Now that U.S. policy seems based on how attractive Obama is, the world is seeking a sober U.S. policy (Winston Mideast Analysis & Commentary, 10/8).
For more on Obama, see prior article.