Research Briefing

Obama Squandering Historic Moment, Engaging In Politics Of Concession And Gambling With America’s Security

RNC CHAIRMAN MICHAEL STEELE: “Today is a wasted opportunity by President Obama. Instead of using this historic moment as the first American president to chair a meeting of the U.N. Security Council to talk about how the nations of the world can come together to fight global terror in places like Iraq and Afghanistan, President Obama has decided to instead engage in the politics of concession and weaken America’s security. It looks like George McGovern has finally won an election.”

TODAY, OBAMA WASTING HISTORIC MOMENT ON POLITICS OF CONCESSION …

Obama Will Be First American President To Chair Meeting Of United Nations Security Council. “U.S. President Barack Obama has made nuclear proliferation, especially Iran’s nuclear program, the centerpiece of his diplomatic efforts at his first U.N. General Assembly meeting. He has put his personal prestige and the prestige of his country on the line as the first U.S. president to chair a Security Council summit on Thursday..” (Jonathan Weisman, “Resolution Draft Bolsters Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/23/09)

But Obama Will Use Meeting To Gamble With America’s Security, Pushing “Deep Cuts” In Our Nuclear Deterrent In Concession To Russia.  “Barack Obama has demanded the Pentagon conduct a radical review of US nuclear weapons doctrine to prepare the way for deep cuts in the country’s arsenal, the Guardian can reveal … The move comes as Obama prepares to take the rare step of chairing a watershed session of the UN security council on Thursday … Moscow’s stance will be closely watched for signs of greater co-operation in return for Obama’s decision last week to abandon a missile defence scheme in eastern Europe, a longstanding source of irritation to Russia” (Julian Borger, “Barack Obama Ready To Slash US Nuclear Arsenal,” Guardian, 9/20/09)

Even Though His Own Defense Secretary Disagrees, Saying “Modernizing Our Nuclear Infrastructure” Critical. “During the campaign, Obama publicly opposed designing new nuclear weapons for the United States. However, just last week, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a holdover appointee from the Bush administration, reiterated his stance that new weapons designs are needed to keep the U.S. arsenal reliable and safe. ‘It is clear, at least to me, that it is important for us to continue to make investments, and I think larger investments, in modernizing our nuclear infrastructure …’ Gates said last week …” (Josh Gerstein, “Obama’s Authority Undercut At UN, G-20,” Politico, 9/21/09)

SAME POLITICS OF CONCESSION THAT DIDN’T WORK FOR OBAMA LAST WEEK

Last Week, Obama Abandoned Missile Defense Plan Designed To Protect America’s Allies From Missile Attack. “President Barack Obama on Thursday scrapped a Bush-era missile defense plan for Europe that Russia had bitterly opposed and offered what he said would be faster, more flexible defense systems to protect against Iran … The shield, involving interceptor missiles in Poland and a radar complex in the Czech Republic, was promoted by Obama’s predecessor George W. Bush to defend against any missile launches from ‘rogue’ states such as Iran and North Korea.” (Jana Mlcochova and Gabriela Baczynska, “U.S. Backs Away From Missile Shield In Europe,” Reuters, 9/17/09)

Decision To Scrap Missile Defense Program Endangers America As Well. “America’s Europe reversal tells other countries that they can’t rely on the U.S. so it’s best to follow the Israeli path and develop their own weapon and defenses... For that matter, this also makes the U.S. East Coast less safe; the ground-based system in Alaska and California covers the East, but barely. The Polish and Czech sites were to provide added protection.” (Editorial, “Obama’s Missile Offense,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/18/09)

Russia Welcomed America’s Concession, But Offered No Concessions Of Their Own. “Russia on Thursday welcomed the news, but said it saw no reason to offer concessions in return.” (Peter Spiegel, “U.S. Shelves Nuclear-Missile Shield,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/17/09)

INSTEAD, OBAMA SHOULD USE HISTORIC MOMENT TO RECOMMIT AMERICA, OTHER NATIONS TO DEFEATING GLOBAL TERROR

In March, Obama Pledged “America Must No Longer Deny Resources To Afghanistan.” “To achieve our goals, we need a stronger, smarter and comprehensive strategy.  To focus on the greatest threat to our people, America must no longer deny resources to Afghanistan because of the war in Iraq.  To enhance the military, governance and economic capacity of Afghanistan and Pakistan, we have to marshal international support.” (“Remarks By The President On A New Strategy For Afghanistan And Pakistan,” The White House, 3/27/09)

But Now, Obama Is “Skeptical” About Sending More Troops.  “President Barack Obama is warning U.S. commanders that he’s ‘skeptical’ about whether more troops will make a difference in Afghanistan...” (Josh Gerstein, “Obama ‘Skeptical’ About More Troops,” Politico, 9/20/09)

• And Obama “Is Holding Off Major Decisions That Could Put Its Military Forces On A Firmer War Footing In Afghanistan Even As Doubts Grow About Whether The United States Can Win There.” (Anne Gearan, “White House Postponing Hard Calls On War,” The Associated Press, 9/15/09)

CNN’s Barbara Starr Reports White House Does Not Want Afghanistan To Get In The Way Of Health Care.  ”The White House is not ready to hear what the General has to say. All indications are McChrystal now believes he needs 30-40 thousand additional troops. Military sources tell us they worry, it’s a huge decision the White House does not want to get in the way of other issues like health care. But senior military officials have long signaled they can’t wait too long given Afghanistan’s collapsing security.” (CNN’s “The Situation Room,” 9/18/09)

Afghan Ambassador Says Time For Obama To “Indicate A Clear Commitment.” “The Afghan ambassador to Washington, Said Jawad, said Obama risks losing support for the war at home and in Europe the longer he ponders. ‘It’s time for the administration to come out and indicate a clear commitment to success and indicate the significance of the mission in Afghanistan,’ Jawad said ...” (Viola Gienger and Indira A.R. Lakshmanan, “Obama Delays Afghanistan Troop Decision As Criticism Deepens,” Bloomberg, 9/17/09)