Now they tell us.
Yesterday, the New York Times offered a fine news analysis
of the Obama style of diplomacy. Our president, the paper reports, attempts to
conduct diplomacy without using a feature that is essential to all successful
diplomacy: a personal connection with other world leaders.
Why doesn’t Obama connect with his peers?
Perhaps, because he is an ideologue, functioning within a
world defined by ideas and by convenient fictions.
It is also possible that he is uncomfortable in his role as
president, does not believe that he earned the position, believes in his heart that he is a fraud and fears that others will
find out. Thus, he avoids any human contact, with foreign leaders or
Congressional leaders… lest he be exposed.
The story is not new, of course. Coming from the Times, it
is noteworthy:
Mr.
Obama’s strained association with Mr. Netanyahu, who has clashed with other
American presidents as well, has been difficult from the start. But the absence
of any real connection between them underscores the rule, not the exception,
for Mr. Obama, who has only occasionally invested time in cultivating foreign
leaders.
It is a
cool, businesslike approach, similar to the way Mr. Obama deals with members of
Congress, donors and activists at home. But historians and some of the
president’s former foreign policy advisers say the distance the president keeps
from foreign leaders leaves him without the durable relationships that previous
presidents forged to help smooth disagreements and secure reluctant
cooperation.
“Personal
relationships are not his style,” said Martin S. Indyk, a former special envoy
for Middle East peace in the Obama administration who is now vice president of
the Brookings Institution. Mr. Indyk said Mr. Bush and President Bill Clinton
“yukked it up with everybody. With Obama, some he invested in, some he clicked
with. But you could count them on one hand.”
Of course, administration officials tell the Times that it
does not really matter. The Times counters:
Robert
Dallek, a historian who has written extensively on the American presidency,
called Mr. Obama a “cool customer” and said he appears not to exude the kind of
warmth that characterized the relationships between Ronald Reagan and Margaret
Thatcher or between Franklin D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill.
“If a
foreign leader connects with another head of government, it can be salutary in
helping them work through difficulties or problems that may exist,” Mr. Dallek
said. “If they have a lot of animus toward each other, it impedes the
diplomatic give and take.”
2 comments:
I keep pointing out that he's inert.
Now he's both inert *and* checked out.
He's not a Bush or a Clinton.
He's not forming a political dynasty of any kind.
Can we stop talking about him now?
Because he really is irrelevant at this point.
Not completely, not for nearly 2 years.
Post a Comment