Big Sky Cairn

Obama fresh off of preaching unity yesterday, took time today to clarify the division between he and Senator John McCain on Iran and al-Qaida.

“Maybe that is why he completely fails to understand that the war in Iraq has done more to embolden America’s enemies than any strategic choice that we have made in decades.”

On the five-year anniversary of the US invasion of Iraq the continued ignorance of foreign policy is astounding. Obama goes on to say our enemies of the Taliban, al-Qaida, Iran and North Korea are the benefactors of US military action in the Middle East.

Of course this would be news to all four of our enemies. According to recent polling, the Taliban is now running approval ratings similar to Nancy Pelosi and the Democrat Congress. The change in attitude towards Islamic extremism runs across national boundaries. The average Afghan and Iraqi have rejected their ideology of hate. In fact, Al-Qaida has been emboldened to the point of recruiting mentally ill Iraqis to carry out their mission of hate.

Meanwhile North Korea is looking at mass famine due to drought. Normally the international community would fill the gaps with foodstuffs; however, China, South Korea and the US are putting concentrated pressure on the North Koreans over their illicit weapons program and cutting back on shipments.

For nearly a decade, South Korea had led the world in providing assistance to the North, while setting almost no conditions on aid and asking few questions about who was getting it.

But South Korea’s new president, Lee Myung-bak, wants to condition some of his country’s gifts of food and fertilizer on progress in removing nuclear weapons from the North, on improvements in human rights and on guarantees that food will go to poor people, not to the North Korean military.

Finally we come to Iran, according to the NIE Iran abandoned its nuclear weapons program in 2003 following an increase in international pressure. If an astute reader looks into the fine print of the NIE, they will come away with the impression that Iran responds to credible threats of force. Far from being emboldened, Iran has yet to restart its nuclear weapons program due to sustains diplomatic pressure from the UN Security Council, the IAEA, and the threat of US military power in the region.

Our assessment that Iran halted the program in 2003 primarily in response to international pressure indicates Tehran’s decisions are guided by a cost-benefit approach rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic, and military costs. This, in turn, suggests that some combination of threats of intensified international scrutiny and pressures, along with opportunities for Iran to achieve its security, prestige, and goals for regional influence in other ways, might—if perceived by Iran’s leaders as credible—prompt Tehran to extend the current halt to its nuclear weapons program. It is difficult to specify what such a combination might be.

In each case the US has worked with local and regional leaders to empower our allies and marginalize our foes. N. Korea is now completely politically isolated from the world. Beijing, due in large part to self-interest, has worked with the US to oppose a nuclear neighbor. Iran has halted its weapons program under the threat of force and a US led diplomatic blitz at the UN and IAEA. Finally, Islamic extremists are on the retreat because the US military empowers and protects the voice of the moderate majority in the Islamic world.

While all four groups are still capable of inflicting serious damage to US interests, it is a tough sell to say that any of them are better positioned now than they were before US military actions in the Middle East.