I have never been a fan of Obama.
My status messages on Facebook during the US elections, a couple of months where I had expressed my concerns on Obama and his policies attracted a lot of attention, and of course angry criticism from friends.
I had often argued, with these people that Obama is too much of an idealist. He seems to to be far detached from reality. He is undoubtedly a great orator, but there's more it than making good speeches.
He started off by projecting that America under him will be different for the rest of the world. but he's falling into a trap that the United States has been falling into for the last 2-3 odd decades. Pakistan continues to blackmail and coax the United States in funding their nefarious and sinister activities.
Obama started off on a "moral" high-ground by wowing to shut down Guantamano Bay, or Gitmo as it is often called, where suspected 9/11 detainees and other hard-core Islamic terrorists had been held. If hard-core terrorists are to be released, isn't the United States shooting itself in the foot? It was also reported that a released Gitmo detainee found his way back to Pakistan, preaching militant Jihad.
Obama also proposed to shift these detainees to high security prisons within the United States which led to a virulent reaction within the country. Quite a few states refused to accept these detainees. There was nasty debate within the political system, between Dick Cheney on the Republican side and the democrats on the other.
And now, in an article titled "Palau to Take Chinese Guantánamo Detainees", The New York Times reports that a Pacific island archipelago nation, Palau has agreed to accept the Gitmo detainees. Who is going to guarantee the security of these prisons? Does Palau have the wherewithal to do that? What prevents al-Qaeda from getting these detainees freed? If that happens, who'll suffer?
The obvious answer is the United States.
Obama has long advocated transparency in methods adopted to deal with terror suspects. He declassified CIA documents but then turned around and refused release photographic evidence of abuse. So much for transparency, Obama has also been called President Flip-Flop by, again, The New York Times. Other examples of his flip-flop on gay rights, abortion, etc. have also been well documented.
Obama reached out to Iran, in a speech on Navroze. Obama reached out to the Muslim world in Cairo a few days ago. But he has to understand that symbolism of beginning speeches with Asalaam Waleikum and talking of his Muslim heritage is not good enough. He has to understand that well-researched speeches are not good enough. He has to understand Hot-Dog Diplomacy is not enough.
Obama needs to go high on substance. He needs to go high on action. He needs to separate the wheat from the chaff in Muslim world. he needs to know whom to back in the military world. Is he doing a great job by backing despots in Pakistan, Iraq, etc.?
North Korea tested a nuclear warhead a few days back. That was met by muted, whimper of reaction from the United States. Why? Wasn't Obama supposed to take a stand from a morally high ground? The answer is simple. A reaction against North Korea would have invited a swift and brutal reaction from the Chinese. Wasn't Obama scared of that?
Obama's weaknesses and abilities have been very well understood by the Americans in general. No wonder, the Wall Street Journal has been talking of Obama's plummeting popularity ratings, which is regarded as measure of the Administration's success.
As far as India is concerned, Obama is yet to find the true co-ordinates. By the time, he figures out what India is, a good 2-3 years of Administration would have gone by. By then, Obama would have lost considerable leverage in India.
Obama promised America, and the world, a whiff of fresh air, but sadly, what we've got is stale Old Wine in a New Bottle...
My status messages on Facebook during the US elections, a couple of months where I had expressed my concerns on Obama and his policies attracted a lot of attention, and of course angry criticism from friends.
I had often argued, with these people that Obama is too much of an idealist. He seems to to be far detached from reality. He is undoubtedly a great orator, but there's more it than making good speeches.
He started off by projecting that America under him will be different for the rest of the world. but he's falling into a trap that the United States has been falling into for the last 2-3 odd decades. Pakistan continues to blackmail and coax the United States in funding their nefarious and sinister activities.
Obama started off on a "moral" high-ground by wowing to shut down Guantamano Bay, or Gitmo as it is often called, where suspected 9/11 detainees and other hard-core Islamic terrorists had been held. If hard-core terrorists are to be released, isn't the United States shooting itself in the foot? It was also reported that a released Gitmo detainee found his way back to Pakistan, preaching militant Jihad.
Obama also proposed to shift these detainees to high security prisons within the United States which led to a virulent reaction within the country. Quite a few states refused to accept these detainees. There was nasty debate within the political system, between Dick Cheney on the Republican side and the democrats on the other.
And now, in an article titled "Palau to Take Chinese Guantánamo Detainees", The New York Times reports that a Pacific island archipelago nation, Palau has agreed to accept the Gitmo detainees. Who is going to guarantee the security of these prisons? Does Palau have the wherewithal to do that? What prevents al-Qaeda from getting these detainees freed? If that happens, who'll suffer?
The obvious answer is the United States.
Obama has long advocated transparency in methods adopted to deal with terror suspects. He declassified CIA documents but then turned around and refused release photographic evidence of abuse. So much for transparency, Obama has also been called President Flip-Flop by, again, The New York Times. Other examples of his flip-flop on gay rights, abortion, etc. have also been well documented.
Obama reached out to Iran, in a speech on Navroze. Obama reached out to the Muslim world in Cairo a few days ago. But he has to understand that symbolism of beginning speeches with Asalaam Waleikum and talking of his Muslim heritage is not good enough. He has to understand that well-researched speeches are not good enough. He has to understand Hot-Dog Diplomacy is not enough.
Obama needs to go high on substance. He needs to go high on action. He needs to separate the wheat from the chaff in Muslim world. he needs to know whom to back in the military world. Is he doing a great job by backing despots in Pakistan, Iraq, etc.?
North Korea tested a nuclear warhead a few days back. That was met by muted, whimper of reaction from the United States. Why? Wasn't Obama supposed to take a stand from a morally high ground? The answer is simple. A reaction against North Korea would have invited a swift and brutal reaction from the Chinese. Wasn't Obama scared of that?
Obama's weaknesses and abilities have been very well understood by the Americans in general. No wonder, the Wall Street Journal has been talking of Obama's plummeting popularity ratings, which is regarded as measure of the Administration's success.
As far as India is concerned, Obama is yet to find the true co-ordinates. By the time, he figures out what India is, a good 2-3 years of Administration would have gone by. By then, Obama would have lost considerable leverage in India.
Obama promised America, and the world, a whiff of fresh air, but sadly, what we've got is stale Old Wine in a New Bottle...
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)