Peter Beinart echoes my analysis of the tough rhetoric coming out of the administration, particularly from Vice-President Joe Biden. I’m constitutionally opposed to the Hegelian fascination with building systems, so I don’t really want to try to understand American foreign policy by breaking it into Hamiltonian, Jeffersonian, Jacksonian, and Wilsonian categories. But, it’s an exercise that can illuminate some things. The primal call for revenge is Jacksonian. And that’s what Biden and Kerry were feeding with their tough talk about how we’re going to deal with the Islamic State.
The question is, in feeding that tradition, do they make it stronger and more demanding (as Ed seems to think) or do they satiate it so that is has less power to coerce (as Peter and I believe)?
You can argue either way, but it’s clear that pandering to the impulse is not the same as following it.
And it’s such a powerful impulse that I don’t think you can ignore it or pretend that it doesn’t exist or behave as if it has no legitimacy.
When an individual is legitimately incensed and wants immediate justice, you can use various strategies to get them to calm down and let cooler heads prevail. You can tear gas and fire rubber bullets at them and blame the victims, as was attempted in Ferguson, Missouri. You can offer to seek justice on their behalf, as the Justice Department promised to do. You can distract them with a shiny object. You can stall and let the passage of time do your work for you.
But you can’t do nothing.
I think people are legitimately incensed that American citizens have been beheaded. The administration has to respond to that. They have to respect that feeling, and they’re entitled to share that feeling.
But foreign policy ultimately cannot be crafted on feelings alone. It must be carefully planned and thought out, and it must be realistic and achievable. When George W. Bush used a bullhorn to promise revenge for the 9/11 attacks, he earned a lot of good will because it was what people wanted to hear. That, in itself, wasn’t the problem. The problem was that they followed the Jacksonian tradition after that and pursued a policy that was driven more by revenge than thoughtfulness.
President Obama cannot ignore people’s desire for revenge, and he must manage that public rage. But, once that rage is managed, he must try to find solutions that will actually work. No, you can’t kill Americans with impunity just because it’s difficult to strike back.
We can figure this out.
American police forces do it all the time. So does the nation of Israel.
And in both cases it’s because there is massive propaganda to excuse the perpetrators.
That should not be the strategy here, but neither should reflex rage and mindless attack. But that is what the GOP is trying to stampede the Obama administration into just like they stampeded the Democrats into the Iraq AUMF in 2002. ….Because the GOP has nothing else to run on and they really don’t even have foreign policy to run on.
And it is a cliche that revenge is best served cold. And accurately. It would be a real pisser to find out that the executioner was in fact a British trained MI-6 agent. And that the theatrics were designed by ISIS members familiar with Western sensibilities. And that the tactical intent was to draw the US into a spasmodic attack that killed more Muslim civilians. Or departed further from the US-stated “rule of law”.
What Bush/Cheney policies have done is delegitimized the US position of moral outrage. It no longer is effective with our allies.
And it is not true that the President is doing nothing. US air strikes have now taken out some tens of pieces of US equipment and killed several hundred ISIS fighters in the equipment or using it for sieges on towns and cities. Joint operations of Kurdish and Iraqi troops (there’s a political change) have re-captured two strategic points. ISIS is facing the potential of rebellions in the towns it has already captured at the extent of its advance. And ISIS is engaged in a two-front war against two opponents who are not yet coordinating operations. Some degree of patience is required. And it would be good to let the GOP froth until after November.
It is Ukraine and NATO where the President is being dragged down the primrose path.
I’m sure you’ll be thrilled to know that Hillary Clinton sees Henry Kissinger as a role model:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clinton-reviews-henry-kissingers-world-order/2014/09/
04/b280c654-31ea-11e4-8f02-03c644b2d7d0_story.html
And why would they have one SoS review another’s book? Like they’d ever say the book sucked?
Clintons learned very quickly what happens to you if you are not an inherited part of the establishment. You get treated like Arkansas white trash. It’s amazing what money, a residence in New York, and reorienting your philosophy to the “right people” can do.
Not to mention the favor to pardon Marc Rich, an absolute litmus test for the Clintons and their dynasty. The ultimate act of treason to American justice, its institutions and principles of right and wrong. Look at the Bill Clinton Foundation and where the money is coming from.
○ State of Israel intercedes on behelf of Marc Rich and to “further I/P peace talks” in 1995
In the confidential cable, entitled “[REDACTED] REQUEST FOR INTERVENTION WITH DOJ ON BEHALF OF MARK [SIC] RICH,” Martin Indyk writes …
John Mersheimer has written the most comprehensive, fact based, and “fair and balanced” review and recommendation for the optimal way forward in Why the Ukraine Crisis is the West’s Fault.
Contrary to the title, he doesn’t claim that the US/West created the mess for devious hegemonic reasons but mostly out of not understanding historical, cultural, and economic elements in the region. Sort of like Bremer/Bush didn’t understand that firing all the Sunnis in occupied Iraq wouldn’t be a good thing. Wouldn’t dispute that Bremer/Bush were ignorant. Although do question why Bush’s good buddy Prince Bandar wouldn’t have informed him. While I’m not convinced that Mersheimer’s read on this point is correct, it does make his larger points easier to accept by those that only view the US FP as being good.
That said, it’s getting a bit tiresome to read/hear: It is Ukraine and NATO where the President is being dragged down the primrose path. From a variety of sources including the generally perceptive Robert Parry and the same sentiment is uttered wrt to Syria. Was GWB ever cut this much slack by these same voices? That it was the Cheney and the neo-cons that dragged him into the messes? That GWB was a good man, albeit a bit dim?
Since his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech, Obama’s public words have been consistent. Odd that so many deny what he says.
Obama in Estonia
Does that sell even in the US? But that’s not the worst that he said.
No less dishonest, fact challenged, and outright lies than what GWB dished out for years.
It doesn’t play in the US, but likely it does in Estonia if only as assurance their Big Brother will back them up for at least a decade of chaos.
I phrased that poorly. Am sure it plays well in Estonia. Presenting the USian standard of living as result of “freedom,” “fighting them over there,” and free markets is an easy sell to those with much lower levels of material wealth.
Another case of “We’re the United States of America; we don’t have to understand other cultures; they must assimilate to the manifest destiny we have created.” Is that the argument for what happened? The foundational premise of neo-conservative foreign policy and Tea Party domestic policy?
Among elite US policymakers is more an ideological fealty than nationalism or ignorance of other cultures. For example, Applebaum had the benefit of the best education that money can buy beginning in elementary school and is now a citizen of Poland. She’s, as billmon has coined, a neoliberalcon.
The Tea Party folks are merely ignorant and have been encouraged to be so throughout their lives.
Not a single word about the true nemesis Saudi Arabia and its jihad propagating Wahhabism in the western world feeding hatred, intolerance and a fertile soil for extremist views of Sharia law and creating a caliphate. Borders, borders … what about the agreement not to expand NATO into the former Soviet bloc, placing a Missile Shield in East Europe. The missiles stationed in NATO ally Turkey were withdrawn by John F. Kennedy in the deal with Nikita Khrushchev on the Cuban missile crisis. Calling NATO on its creeping expansion towards Moscow.
U.S. Generals have spoken out about Israel and the Palestinian issue being a national security threat. Not a word from Obama, Biden, Cameron or Rasmussen about 1967 border, occupation and terror bombing raids. Such hypocrisy.
BREAKING NEWS: Ukraine’s president confirms signing of ceasefire deal [5 min. ago]
Yesterday Obama threw Ukraine on Russia’s mercy while also saying if Russia tried to do this in the Baltics it would be war. I’d be surprised if that didn’t enter the calculus of the ceasefire in some way.
Wasn’t the MH17 report due to be released about now? (A few of us aren’t forgetting.) Coincidence that instead there’s a cease fire agreement in Ukraine? I’m probably too suspicious but can’t help sensing that some backroom deal was done.
“But foreign policy ultimately cannot be crafted on feelings alone. It must be carefully planned and thought out, and it must be realistic and achievable. When George W. Bush used a bullhorn to promise revenge for the 9/11 attacks, he earned a lot of good will because it was what people wanted to hear. That, in itself, wasn’t the problem. The problem was that they followed the Jacksonian tradition after that and pursued a policy that was driven more by revenge than thoughtfulness. “
In the days after 9/11 I wasn’t sure what the correct response should be but I was sure what we ultimately did wasn’t it. I was actually somewhat optimistic and even excited that the events of 9/11 would bring to the front the best thinking and character in America.
On the one year anniversary of 9/11 I had perhaps the worst night of my life sitting up as a father worried for my kid’s and my nation’s future because all thinking was pushed out except thoughts of vengeance and hate and fear. I knew we were entering a long period of stupid. And we are still pretty much in it. Despite Obama getting elected and doing so much right the stupid, even if it resides mostly in the minority, trumps all.
When has foreign attack ever brought anything but a massive desire for revenge in this country? The successes have been when the leadership is smart enough to shape that desire into something constructive feedbaclike FDR.
The US: waving the bloody shirt since Crispus Attucks.
I have absolutely zero desire for revenge.
Let’s just whip up the war machine and get this pathetic spectacle over with:
Syria May Have Hidden Chemical Arms, U.S. Says
But you can’t do nothing.
I think people are legitimately incensed that American citizens have been beheaded. The administration has to respond to that. They have to respect that feeling, and they’re entitled to share that feeling.
The slow, choking, well-deserved demographic and cultural death of Traditional America is sometimes the only thing that keeps me sane at night. I can’t wait until we have to stop pandering to the egos and insecurities of these vengeful, benighted perverts. No more having to humiliate and degrade this country through lesser evils to stave off the shrieks of deferred domination and bullying rage.
Listen, I’m also incensed that two Americans were beheaded. But there are much better reasons for destroying ISIS than mere revenge. They have to be destroyed because they are a genuine, high-order threat on many levels, including to the Muslim religion itself. The fact that they killed a couple of Americans is nothing compared to what they have already done or want to do.
So despite the emotional desire for revenge, that would not be the main reason for response, and it does not need to be the primary color in the response. The response need to be rational and prudent in all respects, because the situation is extremely complicated and difficult. This is what Pres. Obama understands and so many of his loudmouthed, rabble-rousing critics do not.
The whole question has been greatly obfuscated by America’s decades of historical experience of being bullshitted into wars, from Korea through Vietnam, through Iraq and even the many attempts to start a war with Iran. And because these wars and the pretexts for them were bullshit, they have had ongoing destructive consequences, of which ISIS is just one of the most obvious. But ISIS is a genuine threat, and there is no reason why dealing with it has to have the same unraveling sort of consequences.
The conditions for effective alliances exist, as pretty much everybody hates these fuckers. And if handled right, the coordinated annihilation of ISIS could even help to counteract the multitude of ethnic and political conflicts in that region, in the sense that we will have to work together toward a common goal and create conditions for peace and stability to prevent it from happening again. Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Kurds, Christians, Yazidis, even Saudi Arabia and the emirates will have to genuinely cooperate under US leadership. And some of those assholes in the latter two areas will have to be tamped down too.
We certainly can’t and are not going to do this alone. But by very judicious planning and management we can act as the catalyst that makes it possible. And at the end of the day, all the people that ISIS has tried to destroy will get their revenge, and we will too.
Yeah.
Right.
They’re “enraged,” alright.
And why?
Because the PermaGov politicians and the Government Media Complex have told them to be enraged, and they obediently follow the mandates of the media in all things.
And on and on it goes, this trance dance.
What “the people” don’t know won’t hurt them.
But of course…sometimes it will.
Big time.
Agnosia in full bloom. They don’t know that they don’t know so they’re as happy as contented cattle being fattened for the slaughter.
Who’s gonna tell them if they don’t search out the truths of the matter?
Ghostbusters?
Please.
Your “Peace President” is gonna leave office at war.
Just like he came in.
Watch.
Later…
AG
At times like this I’m so grateful to have Obama in office. Hilary Clinton would be a step in the wrong direction but still so much better than any Republican. Reagan would probably station a battleship in the Mediterranean and fire some big shells into the desert. There was no strategic thought behind it and that was typically the end of the story.
Well if you’ve been in a grocery store checkout lane lately, The Globe is pretty sure they have the proper response to it. They’re front page calls for the President to be impeached as a result of the murder. Pretty nauseating.
Their front page. Sorry.
I haven’t seen any references in these discussions to Daniel Pearl where Khalid Sheikh Mohammed of AlQaeda beheaded him. That surprises me as I thought that moment of horror would remain close to the surface.
It sounds as though the coalition is coming together to fight ISIL (nice to see Turkey joining in); will this time see a response that is able to weed out the states that have allowed ISIL to get a foothold and manage to focus instead on the terrorists separately?
I’m reminded of an English fox hunt.
They had to minimize the impulse for direct revenge wrt the beheading of Daniel Pearl because it took place in Pakistan.
By AlQueda.
I get the snark(? maybe I’m wrong) in Founding Fathers visions of foreign policy. The world-wide name is NATIONALISM, and the results can go from keeping your citizens happy and proud, to extremes like today;s Putin.
I say extremes regarding Putin because he has let the Nationalism become More important than anything else, and to keep the acolytes happy, you have to give them MORE, and no better excuse to invade another country than
using heritage( Nationalism) as an Excuse to cause KAKA!
Another example being thrown in America’s face daily is the Nationalism of Saudi Arabia. They ALLOW Madrasas to teach HATRED of America, so the citizens won’t realize that the BAD AMERICAN GRINGOS are really the royal family.
Americans were beheaded in SOMEONE ELSE’S COUNTRY. Want to keep you head on your shoulders? Only go where you are invited and/or welcomed. Filming/writing in a war zone comes with the possibility of death, possibly a gruesome death, possibly intentionally. That comes with the violent territory.
Here’s the irony. The people (independent journalists) who were executed were likely tagged in NSA databases as ISIS sympathizers just because they voluntarily went to Syria. It would be worth a FOIA or two to see what their watchlist files looked like.
More likely that freelance journalists were targeted as covert US operatives by various insurgent groups.
Which makes them doubly stigmatized.
James Foley was embedded with a US military unit early in his short journalism career. Captured and later released in Libya. So, doubt he was on any USG ISIS sympathizer list.
Metadata chaining could still have put him on the list. There is nothing rational about how this screening from a “get it all” standpoint works to identify actual threats. It is high-priced craziness, and it is sad to see President Obama so tied to preserving it.
So many false positives that it’s essentially a very expensive and worthless exercise. Except for the individuals and corporations making good bucks off producing garbage.
It seems that Samantha Power is now fearmongering doubts about Syria’s complete disarmament of chemical weapons – what is a Obama foreign policy success. And raising the possibility of biological weapons, which is just bizarre.
There is fearmongering to diffuse anger but this is likely to create a hysteria for war unlikely to abate. And focuses on Iran and Russia, both of whom the US despearately needs to restore stability in the Levant. (not to mention the as-yet undelivered cooperation of Israel to de-escalation).
Other blogs have caught that phenomena much, much earlier. Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, and Samantha Power do not differ as I have written before. So this is no surprise. Don’t expect facts or evidence from your Government in DC, it’s mainly a mix of lies and propaganda. Same for Obama’s press conference today at the NATO Summit in Wales. The Europeans have been lenient accepting much of the narrative. The past few days, elder statesmen and politicians have come forward to throw a wrench in the machine of neocon warmongering.
our gov in DC not “your”
and Tarheel Dem’s “hall of mirrors” is a better description than “all lies and propaganda”. Look at what is happening – Turkey now in the alliance against ISIS, that is good. Listen to the analysis in this link
http://www.wnyc.org/story/defining-isis/
In some instances, Western journalists took immense risks to report from rebel-held territory. Some were killed in airstrikes by the Syrian AF, but a larger number and more frequently journalists are getting killed by one of dozens of rebel factions. The rebels operate in small groups, once you are deep inside rebel territory, you are fully dependent on the “loyalty” of a person you trust. In this war, loyalty can be bought or discarded by a stronger leader and the kidnap process has started. Once a journalist has become a commodity, he will end up by the highest bidder. For a Brit or an American, that will be ISIL in Raqqa. Nothing new in this ugly civil/ethnic war where thousands have been summarily executed often after a period of torture.
From my post in May 2013 …
Senator McCain, I dare you visit the “liberated” city of Al Raqqa in Syria and tell all of us how well the opposition forces are united in the surge for democracy in Syria …
Syria’s Raqqa caught in the crossfire
○ Statement Free Syrian Army: Will Break with Infidel Powers | Sept. 2013
Equally reprehensible, U.S. forces deliberately killing journalists in Afghanistan and Iraq during the occupation.
If I’m reading b of Moon of Alabama’s report correctly, NATO has given Obama the cover he needs to continue the current limited policy by rejecting a US/UK proposal. Have we sussed out that Obama understands that sometimes getting a public proposal rejected (entitlement reform) actually furthers your strategy. The Republican refusal to govern has made all politics a hall of mirrors and indirection.
The public has no way of knowing what the real policy is.
And without public knowledge, democratic consent is impossible.
I couldn’t disagree with this post more; essentially you are sublimating rational response to the emotive:
“I think people are legitimately incensed that American citizens have been beheaded. The administration has to respond to that. They have to respect that feeling, and they’re entitled to share that feeling.”
Uhm, no.
“President Obama cannot ignore people’s desire for revenge, and he must manage that public rage.”
Yes he can, and no, there is no extant need to manage public rage (if in fact such a thing exists).
Further, this ‘primal (Jacksonian) call’ for revenge sounds like bullshit.
“I think people are legitimately incensed that American citizens have been beheaded.”
I disagree. While watching (or reading about) anyone getting their heads sawed off is horrible, it isn’t particularly terrible. I’ve seen worse…but perhaps what outrages us is different.
If you’re unable to set aside your emotional response and see IS thru an objective lens, then your capacity as an analyst is compromised.