- MUST READS
- PRODUCTS
- RESOURCES
- MULTIMEDIA
- ENFACTLOPEDIA
- FSM AUTHORS
- ABOUT US
- CONTACT US
- FSM BLOG
- DONATE
- PRESS COVERAGE
SEARCH FSM
- IN THIS SECTION
June 9, 2009
Exclusive: Is Advancing U.S. Security on Obama’s Agenda?
Presidential Policy: Does It Make the Grade?, James Carafano, PhD
President Obama’s speech in Cairo proved to be the number one national security story last week, part of his public diplomacy effort to build alliances in the Islamic world and deter Islamist extremism. The speech received generally good reviews in here at home and overseas. There are real questions, however, on whether it did much to advance U.S. security or our national interests. First, the speech in character was much the same as his commencement address at Notre Dame and speech at the National Archives on combating terrorism. On each occasion, the president said something to please almost everyone on extremely controversial subjects. Though these speeches may serve to solidify his personal popularity, they also create high and unrealistic expectations, while offering no new proposals to make the nation safer. Second, among the many problems pointed out in a Heritage Foundation analysis, “Obama missed an opportunity to clearly identify the common enemy: Islamist extremists. Instead, he spoke of "violent extremists," shied away from using the term Islamist, and glossed over terrorism, which continues to be a threat not only to Americans but to Muslims as well.” Finally, it seems unlikely that the President’s speech will do much to stem Islamist extremism. Al Qaeda “number two” Ayman al-Zawahri has already denounced the speech. We are still waiting to hear the reaction on the terrorist Internet. There are about 50,000 extremist Web sites in 15 different languages. It will take awhile to assess trends there. If the Arab press is any indicator, mostly likely we’ll find the speech has done little counter extremism in the Muslim world.
Washington is also buzzing over the likelihood that the North Koreans may conduct another long-range missile test. Even before this news the debate over North Korea’s ballistic and nuclear program has been heating up. As a result, the administration may be changing its tune on a proposed $1.4 billion cut to the missile defense budget. Last week, Secretary Gates admitted, “[i]f anything, I think what the North Koreans have done has won more adherence to the importance of our having at least a unified missile defense capability.” Reversing the cuts is essential, according to Heritage analyst, Baker Spring, who called the Gates’ cuts “contradictory and confused.”
Finally, Iran refused to keep quiet. The same week that Obama declared it was important to accommodate “other” views and that Tehran had the right to “nuclear energy,” Iranian President Ahmadinejad declared that his country “is a nuclear power and ready to participate in running the world.” So far there is no sign that Iran is turning back from its quest for nuclear weapons and long-range ballistic missiles. A recent chilling report by the Iran Working Group looks at the policy challenges the US will face after Tehran conducts its first nuclear test.
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor James Jay Carafano, Ph.D., is a leading expert in defense affaires, intelligence, military operations and strategy, and homeland security at the Heritage Foundation. Feedback: editorialdirector@familysecuritymatters.org.
Reader Comments: Submit Your Comment (0)
| Print This E-mail This |
|
