OBAMA'S NEW FOREIGN POLICY

The foreign policy community’s anxious wait to hear US
President Barack Obama make his foreign policy speech
at the West Point Military Academy finally came to an
end on 28 May, 2014. In his commencement address to
the graduating military officers, President Obama
outlined his foreign policy views and approaches that
stunned some analysts, and pleased many ruling elites
abroad.
Some saw a new foreign policy approach in the US
president’s speech, but those who keenly follow US
foreign policy, saw very little in the content that could
be described as new.
What was striking in the presidential address was
Obama’s strong articulation of liberal institutionalism at
a time when the potential military and economic rivals
of the US are busy flexing their muscles in parts of
Europe and Asia.
Highlighting the importance of observing international
norms and rules, President Obama said, “American
influence is always stronger when we lead by example.
We cannot exempt ourselves from the rules that apply
to everyone else.... What makes us exceptional is not
our ability to flout international norms and the rule of
law; it’s our willingness to affirm them through our
actions.”
The decision to affirm the importance of international
law, norms and institutions by a US president in the
backdrop of one military intervention every 17 months
between 1991 and 2001 is certainly a refreshing
development to believers in multilateralism. Obama
chided “a lot of sceptics who downplay the effectiveness
of multilateral action,” and said, “working through
international institutions, like the U.N. or respecting
international law” was not a sign of “weakness.”
While many would contest his own approach to the UN
in executing his war against terror in Afghanistan by
use of Drones, championing liberal institutionalism at a
time of planned withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan
is understandable.
President Obama, moreover, has shown utmost restraint
in dealing with difficult situations, such as the ones in
Syrian civil war, Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the
Chinese occupations of islands and atolls in South
China Sea. His difficulty in handling violence and
lawlessness in Iraq post the US withdrawal; in Egypt
after the Arab Spring; and in Libya after the overthrow
of Col. Muammar Gaddafi’s regime gives ample reason
to sing the praise of liberal approach to international
politics as opposed to the neoconservative penchant for
frequent use of military and coercive diplomacy in
dealing with international crises.
Obama coded his policy of using soft power instead of
military means in this address by saying, “...U.S.
military action cannot be the only, or even primary,
component of our leadership in every instance. Just
because we have the best hammer does not mean that
every problem is a nail.”
Advocates multilateralism would certainly draw
inspiration from Obama’s liberal approach to world
affairs, but it is important note the traditional US foreign
policy approach, cutting across the political divide that
wasn’t missing in Obama’s speech. He made it loud
and clear: “Let me repeat a principle.... The United
States will use military force, unilaterally if necessary,
when our core interests demand it.” And the US will
obviously determine what that “core interests” would
be. Does it mean his advocacy of liberalism is mere
opportunism?
In any case, Obama has come under fire from many
critics who say his foreign policy is just a “hedging
strategy” and devoid of any “grand strategy.” Many
Republicans and some Democrats have criticised his
foreign policy as “global retrenchment” of the US that
has shaken the confidence of allies and pleased the
adversaries.
Some have lamented that he said little about meeting
the emerging Russian challenge in Europe and the
Chinese effort to dominate Asia. Newspaper editorials in
the US carried no praise for Obama’s new foreign
policy. Lawmakers in the US too remained unhappy.
One Senator made a caustic remark on Obama’s
speech: “The President’s speech was just another great
example of his disastrous foreign policy. The reset and
the pivots have all failed. All you have to do is look at
Syria, Iran, Libya, Ukraine, or the South China Sea to
see where this foreign policy gets us in the world.”
President Obama has approximately one and a half
years before he leaves the White House. Many citizens
of the US were expecting the president to spell out his
foreign policy plans in coming months, but failed to get
any satisfaction from the West Point speech. The rest of
the world always carefully listens when an US president
speaks.
The fact that there was hardly any adverse reaction to
his speech from the rest of the world signals that
Obama was actually speaking to his own people at
West Point. One key new suggestion that needs more
clarification is his proposal to set up $5billion worth
structure to combat terrorism with willing partners
around the world.