Detachment from reality
Obama hits a wall in Berlin
“Obama’s vanity is a wonder of the world
that never loses its power to astonish.”
- George F. Will
Putative U.S. president Barack Obama speaks in Berlin, June 2013
By George F. Will, Published: June 20
The question of whether Barack Obama’s second term will
be a failure was answered in the affirmative before his Berlin debacle, which
has recast the question, which now is: Will this
term be silly, even scary in its detachment from reality?
Before Berlin, Obama set his steep downward trajectory by
squandering the most precious post-election months on gun-control
futilities and by a subsequent
storm of scandals that have made his unvarying project — ever bigger, more
expansive, more intrusive and more
coercive government — more repulsive. Then came Wednesday’s pratfall
in Berlin.
There he vowed energetic measures against global warming
(“the global threat of our time”). The 16-year
pause of this warming was not predicted by, and is not explained by, the
climate models for which, in his strange understanding of respect for science,
he has forsworn skepticism.
Regarding another threat, he spoke an almost meaningless
sentence that is an exquisite example of why his rhetoric cannot withstand
close reading: “We may strike blows against terrorist networks, but if we ignore
the instability and intolerance that fuels extremism, our own freedom will
eventually be endangered.” So, “instability and intolerance” are to blame for
terrorism? Instability where? Intolerance of what by whom “fuels” terrorists?
Terrorism is a tactic of destabilization. Intolerance is, for terrorists, a
virtue.
It is axiomatic: Arms control is impossible until it is
unimportant. This is because arms control is an arena of competition
in which nations negotiate only those limits that advance their interests.
Nevertheless, Obama trotted out another golden oldie in Berlin when he vowed to
resuscitate the cadaver
of nuclear arms control with Russia. As though Russia’s arsenal is a
pressing problem. And as though there is reason to think President Vladimir
Putin, who calls the Soviet Union’s collapse “the
greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century,” is interested in reducing
the arsenal that is the basis of his otherwise Third World country’s claim
to great-power status.
Shifting his strange focus from Russia’s nuclear weapons,
Obama said “we can . . . reject the nuclear weaponization that North
Korea and Iran may be seeking.”
Were Obama given to saying such stuff off the cuff, this
would be a good reason for handcuffing him to a teleprompter. But, amazingly, such stuff is put on his teleprompter
and, even more amazing, he reads it aloud.
Neither the people who wrote those words nor he who spoke
them can be taken seriously. North Korea and
Iran may be seeking nuclear weapons? North Korea may have such
weapons. Evidently Obama still entertains doubts that Iran is seeking them.
In
Northern Ireland before going to Berlin, Obama sat next to Putin, whose demeanor
and body language when he is in Obama’s presence radiate disdain. There Obama said: “With respect to Syria, we do have differing
perspectives on the problem, but we share an interest in reducing
the violence.” Differing perspectives?
Obama wants to reduce the violence by coaxing Syria’s
Bashar al-Assad, who is winning the war, to attend a conference at which he negotiates
the surrender of his power. Putin wants to reduce the violence by helping —
with lavish materiel assistance and by preventing diplomacy that interferes —
Assad complete the destruction of his enemies.
Napoleon said: “If you start to take Vienna — take
Vienna.” Douglas MacArthur said that all military disasters can be
explained by two words: “Too late.”
Regarding Syria, Obama is tentative and, if he insists on the folly of
intervening, tardy. He is giving Putin a golden opportunity to humiliate the
nation responsible for the “catastrophe.” In a contest between a dilettante and
a dictator, bet on the latter.
Obama’s vanity is a wonder of the world that never loses
its power to astonish, but really: Is everyone in his orbit too lost in
raptures of admiration to warn him against delivering a speech soggy with
banalities and bromides in a city
that remembers John Kennedy’s “Ich bin ein Berliner” and Ronald
Reagan’s “Tear
down this wall”?
With German Chancellor Angela Merkel sitting nearby,
Obama began his Berlin speech: “As I’ve said, Angela and I don’t exactly
look like previous German and American leaders.” He has indeed said
that, too, before, at least about himself. It was mildly amusing in Berlin
in 2008, but hardly a Noel Coward-like witticism worth recycling.
His look is just not that interesting. And after being
pointless in Berlin, neither is he, other than for the surrealism of his second
term.
1 comment:
As the saying goes... "You Can't Fix Stupid!"
Post a Comment