Obama and the Syrian confusion

Written by Nasser Kandil,

In an interview with the writer of history of the US presidents Doris Goodwin which was published yesterday in “Vanity Fair magazine”, it assumed the presidential biography of the US President Barack Obama while he is at the gates of leaving the White House, presenting personal comparisons between him and between his understanding and his reading of the biographies of the presidents, classifying them between the honorable who left indelible impact in the history of the United States and have formed a source of inspiration for him in his political and presidential experience, especially the President Abraham Lincoln. Obama has presented an attempt to interpret his biography as a young man descendant of the American Negroes, who are busy in challenge, ambition of self-assertion, and the ability to present something new and remarkable; he emphasized their leading capacities in the life of country in which they suffered the bitterness of getting the right of integration in their environment and institutions. Obama tried to be modest in presenting himself and his accomplishments, satisfying of saying that he is proud that he dismissed America the falling into pitfalls which others may fall in.

In front of the question about the bewildering issues in which the president whose his mandate will end soon says that maybe he could behave in different way, so what is it? Obama says that “I have done well in various issues which I have dealt with internally and externally, politically, economically, and militarily, but the issue of Syria remains, I am unable to answer the question was it possible for us to do something and we have not done it”, he was to finish this tragedy till he obviated, “surely I do not mean to do what others call me to do and what others blame me for not doing. I am confident that I had done what I did by not listening to the reckless tips or listening to the waves of anger, but neither arming the opposition nor coming for military strike under the slogan of using the chemical weapons would make difference”, “Sometimes I say” Obama continues “I mean what we did not do, ideas that did not come into our minds”. “I wonder if the matter was proposed to Lincoln and Roosevelt, would they take decisions that did not come into my mind?

The Syrian confusion of Obama which based on the recognition that the military escalation against the Syrian country would not make better situation of America, even if he suggested through his speech better situation intended to Syria, he meant Syria which the Americans like to see, which means Syria which does not worry Israel and which the other allies of America or those who rule feel comfortable to it, thus the intention of the search is serving the US interests and politics, but this is not a criticism to the US President, but it is an explanation of the approach of his search and opening the door; really what Obama would do from this perspective not from the perspective of Syria, as we see it?. This is our task, not the task of the US President and we cannot expect it from him.

It is the right of the observer to wonder away from the genius demand, through which Obama talks about his predecessors, and where he says humbly that he did not have alike, why the elected US President in 2008 ignores resorting to what was stated of recommendations in the report of the Committee of Iraq which the Congress has formed early 2006, and has issued its

report and recommendations at the end of this year, knowing that the US President Barack Obama has taken the commitment of withdrawing from Iraq and closing Guantanamo, he knows that it is from the rare committees which was formed by the Congress and headed by the representatives of the two parties as a recognition of the national crisis to assume the name of its two heads James Baker and Lee Hamilton, and maybe it is from the few rare staff which looks like the thought of Lincoln which Obama considers him his inspirer; in its combining the two parties in the major national crises. The committee reached to conclusions and has put recommendations, if Obama drew his foreign policy according to it, the war would not take place neither in Syria nor in Libya and the region would not expose to this mass destruction.

The elected US President cannot ignore directly after the issuance of the report of Baker Hamilton the fact that there was a decision of putting the recommendations aside knowing that the president was a partner in its taking, despite of what was provided by the language of the report, the recommendations and their issuance under the name of the two parties of moral support and historic devotion to the president who adopted them as an approach of his policy. Obama has only withdrawn from Iraq and closed Guantanamo as promises of the report recommendations, but he neglected the fundamental and the main part which he returns to it today and which the US policy returns to it regardless the obstinacy and many attempts of denial, in addition to the projects of obstinacy hoping to adjust that or change that. So was the continuation of increasing the sanctions on Iran by coincidence, hoping to submit it in its nuclear program and its regional policies, knowing that in front of the president there were signed recommendations from more than seventy figures of the Republican and the Democratic parties that call to admit that Iran is a nuclear country that has influence over the files of Iraq, Afghanistan, and the security of the Gulf and the energy. Was it by coincidence that the president said in 2010 that he will not exert pressure on Israel to accept a settlement for the Palestinian Cause which is less than a cheap and modest, while he examined carefully in reading a report that says that there is no reluctance in obliging Israel to accept a Palestinian country on the occupied territories since 1967 which its capital is the Eastern Jerusalem with resolving the issue of the refugees based on the UN resolution 194 of the right of return and compensation. So did the president who signed the decision of setting up the missile shields on the European areas off Russia miss that the mentioned report has recommended him of correcting the path of the cooperation with Russia and giving up of the language of the arrogance and the provocation which the administration of his predecessor George Bush has pursued. regarding Syria, the report recommended of the recognition of Syria as an active regional country and indispensable partner in the stability of Iraq and Lebanon, and a central country in the Arab Israeli conflict, so was his approach of Syria established from the illusion of this recognition?

The US President Obama cannot convince us that he has no regrets because he ignored the report which he read and has got the inspiration from it about the most prominent item of his foreign policy; the withdrawal from Afghanistan, after he gave up of the request of the withdrawal from Afghanistan which was a part of his campaign for the nomination before he was selected, then he returned to the decision of the withdrawal under the demand of the same party which asked him to give it up before, it is the organization of politics and decision- making in America which positions between the army and the intelligence, it is the party which he obeyed by adopting fluid positions toward the Palestinian Cause, then he came preaching during his visit to Cairo after his

presidential winning without a project, and after he had accepted to give up of his own speech of resolving the Palestinian issue, deterring the Israeli provocations, and taking the region to peace that is based on the rules of the international law. This was the main title in the policies which Obama the romantic presidential candidate was looking to before he turned into the real candidate who is acceptable by the decision- making organization.

The fairness requires from Obama the admission that he was a victim of disinformation and bargains that controlled his arrival to the White House and have required from him accepting moral concessions, which it is revealed today that they caused the mass destruction to the Arab and Islamic countries and have brought the dangers to the world, because these countries ignored facts that were clear and apparent, they have insisted on waging dangerous tests because they lived the state of denial of the facts which their titles were drawn by the recommendations of Baker-Hamilton. Because the avoidance of the hard choices of the report and its recommendations has come as a result of the illusion of the ability to change the facts and was the Soft War or the Smart War which based on bombing the national entities in the countries of the Mediterranean and destabilize the project of the country in them. The climax was the Syrian war which Obama knows that that he is the first one who said that the illusion of the presence of a moderate opposition is nothing but a fantasy, he knows the credibility of what his Vice President Joe Biden said in front of professors, students, and graduates of Harvard about the role of Washington’s allies in bringing the terrorism, resettling it, and supporting it to be rooted in Syria and thus to be the strength of the” revolution” under the American eye.

Obama did not convince himself to convince us once again successively in two consecutive days, as he knows that the world was safer during the Cold War, he knows that there is no reason for the confusion about Syria, the report of Baker Hamilton was on his desk before he entered to the White House, but it is enough for Obama to remember and to evaluate on the comparison the situation of Syria, what has happened in the Iranian nuclear program, which the policy of siege and sanctions has led to make the negotiation starting from new round from points where Iran has not reached in the previous round, till enriching uranium has become on high degrees. Furthermore, what Iran has conceded in the understanding has become just some of what it accomplished in stages of the negotiation and which would not be included in any understanding if it was signed with the starting of the negotiation. So what if Obama followed the recommendations of Baker-Hamilton since the start of his mandate and he started with Iran, Syria, and Palestine as an integrated tripartite?, would he imagine the Middle East which would conduct the track of democracy and the freedoms smoothly and peacefully and that his people before his government would consider favorably the US policies. According to the US President this consideration is the center of the US interests and the tool of their protection.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,