It should be pointed out here that in spite of all
the criticism from all sides of President George W. Bush, in fact he followed
Reagan’s Rules in dealing with both Afghanistan and Iraq. He made the Reagan
Rule 1 case that each instance involved the vital “national interest” of the
United States. He followed the Reagan Rule 2 and went all-in to win — while it
was Obama who eventually got Osama it was the infrastructure set up by Bush
that made it possible, and Bush himself was responsible for getting Saddam
literally out of his hiding hole.
As recommended by Reagan Rule 3 Bush went out and
sold the Congress and the majority of the American people on the need to go
into both Afghanistan and Iraq, specifically getting congressional
authorization. And after repeatedly working through the UN to get Saddam
Hussein to open up and come clean — and failing repeatedly — it’s very safe to
say Bush and company saw the invasion of Iraq as Reagan Rule 4’s “last
resort.”
America is now in a very difficult spot — precisely
because in the Obama era it has abandoned Reagan’s mantra of Peace through
Strength.
What we now have — what liberalism in foreign policy
always produces from Vietnam to Syria — is War through Weakness.
The so-called “re-set” of American relations with
Russia proclaimed by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has resulted in
Vladimir Putin having nothing but disdain for the American president and his country.
Whether the issue is the return of Edward Snowden or blocking action on Syria
in the United Nations Security Council, bluntly speaking Putin has given a
scornful diplomatic obscene gesture to Obama and Clinton and now John Kerry’s
foreign policy.
Going to Congress is the exactly right thing to do.
It is no small thing. It is the Constitutional thing to do. Ted Cruz sending
out a tweet that showed the British Parliament in full session discussing Syria
while the floor of the U.S. Senate was empty was exactly right. Cruz, Rand
Paul, and others are to be applauded — and yes so too the President.
But unfortunately doing the right thing so late —
and worse complicating the issue immeasurably by blurting out off-prompter talk
of a “red line” and giving the impression of great urgency—then befuddling the
whole issue by holding off until the scheduled return of Congress on September
9 is precisely the wrong image to be sending abroad.
If Syria is as urgent an issue as Secretary of State
Kerry insisted it is, the President should have forthwith stepped in front of
the cameras and stated that he was using his authority as provided by Article
II, Section 3 of the Constitution, which reads in part that the president “may,
on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses.”
One of Reagan’s heroes was his old friend Harry
Truman, whom the young actor and then-Democrat had supported for re-election to
the White House in 1948. It was Truman who recalled Congress in a special
session not over an issue of war or peace but for a political confrontation
with Republicans over his 1948 election agenda. If Truman can do it to make a
mere point in a political campaign, Obama should certainly be doing it in a
situation which is infinitely of more moment — an actual question of war or
peace.
This is a turning point in modern American history.
It is as much about Iran as it is Syria. It is about
the American role in the world. It is about the Constitution of the United
States. It is about understanding that peace comes through strength and war
comes from the perception of weakness.
Ronald Reagan’s success as president came about not
in spite of his failure in Beirut but because he learned from that mistake. He
made a point of rebuilding the American military that had been so terribly
weakened by his predecessor — but he also learned the hard way that real
military strength is not simply about “sending in the Marines.” Real military
strength comes rather from first, having the military strength — and then
knowing when not to send in the Marines — or for that matter
cruise missiles either.
Reagan understood the importance of the
Constitution. He well understood his authority as commander-in-chief to protect
the vital national security interests of the country. Failing to get those 800
American medical students out of Grenada peacefully, Reagan knew what he had
the authority to do. Getting the urgent plea from governments in America’s back
yard to stop a Communist revolution bristling with arms, ammunition as well as
Cubans, Russians and all manner of Soviet allies dedicating themselves to
Communizing said American back yard — Reagan knew he had the constitutional
authority to go into Grenada.
He never hesitated. Saying simply: “Do it.”
But after Beirut, Reagan made sure he was not
turning the United States into some globe-straddling empire. He concentrated on
defeating the premiere American enemy of the day — the “Evil Empire” that was
the Communist Soviet Union. His philosophy, as he said at the time, was clear:
“We win, they lose.”
What we have today is a president who has, in the
style of liberalism everywhere, induced the weakness that invites war. All of
five years of repeatedly sending a message of weakness by bowing to this or
that foreign potentate, trying to make friends with the likes of the Muslim
Brotherhood while happily sending video greetings to the Imams of Iran and more
has now resulted in chemical weapons being loosed upon the people of Syria. Not
to be forgotten either is the fact that, as Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) has
sharply reminded:
Even Gen. [Martin] Dempsey (chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff) said we are putting our military on a path where the ‘force is
so degraded and so unready’ that it would be ‘immoral to use the force…’
In short?
The Obama foreign policy has served up a mess. A
lethal mess.
How to get out of this mess? Where to begin this
discussion in the Congress on September 9?
Recalling Reagan’s Rules for Military Action would
be a good place to start the debate.
No comments:
Post a Comment