The world is coming undone. Chaos, violence and disorder are spreading quickly.
The depreciating ruble and declining oil prices have made Russia more desperate than ever. Ukrainian violence is on the rise. The Islamic State group barbarically set a captured Jordanian pilot on fire. And an American girl has been killed in a retaliation-Jordanian airstrike.
With all of this unrest in the world, all eyes and ears are on President Barack Obama. The world wants an end to the senseless violence. The world wants to know what the president plans to do.
What is the president’s new plan? National Security Adviser Susan Rice highlighted the administration’s bold and action-packed foreign plan of action. It’s called “strategic patience.”
The title is a bit vague, but in all fairness it seems like a good idea at first blush.
For me, the title conveys contemplative deliberateness. It describes a president who wants to take his time making a decision. He weighs all opinions. He acts in a careful manner. He waits to engage with his enemies. He thinks before speaking. He defers action. He wants to stop America from being the world police. He doesn’t want America to be aggressive on the world stage.
Now going back to reality, strategic patience does none of this. The title is just a ruse. Under this plan, America will continue to be front and center on international developments.
The plan is neither passive, strategic nor patient.
The plan is not passive: National Security Adviser Susan Rice commented that under the new plan, the U.S. “will exact an appropriate cost on transgressors.” In addition to this, Rice pointed out that the country must prevent the spread of radicalism in the Middle East and stop nuclear-arms proliferation “even as we rally the world to meet the threats of tomorrow.” This hardly sounds like we’re stepping out of world affairs.
The plan is not strategic: If the title of the plan is vague, how can you expect the plan itself to be any better? If we take a look at the foreign policy of the past six years, it’s hard to say that anything truly strategic has come from the White House. I’ll give you the assassination of bin Laden. But after that, can you think of another strategic foreign policy victory?
A drone strike to a Middle Eastern village is not my definition of strategic policy. Nor is drawing a “red line” and promising to act in the Syrian Civil War but never following through.
But consider the plan itself. USA Today outlines the key features of strategic patience: regarding Russia, “The strategy calls for continued diplomatic and economic pressure on Russia for its incursion into Ukraine, working ‘in lockstep with our European allies.’” With the Islamic State, “The United States will ‘prioritize collective action’ to address the threat from the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, and from related groups.” And pertaining to North Korea, just because we like mentioning it every now and again, “The United States is ‘modernizing our alliances’ with Japan, South Korea, Australia and the Philippines to counter North Korean provocation.”
These are just sweet nothings whispered in the country’s ear. Unless your definition of strategic planning is putting out a list of no-duhs and overused talking points, this is hardly tactical.
The plan is not patient: With little time remaining in office, the president wants a few more foreign-policy wins before taking off on Marine One. And staying true to the past, we can expect that our affairs on the world stage will be hasty and bumbling. For the next two years, our foreign policy will be even more ad hoc.
America’s new strategic plan is doomed from the start. It does nothing the country wants or the world needs. The world will not be a better place because the U.S. commits itself to another haphazard foreign plan of action.
This policy and the administration are hopelessly confused, completely misleading and sadly mistaken.
Michael Beato is a UF economics junior. His column appears on Thursdays.
[A version of this story ran on page 6 on 2/12/2015 under the headline “Obama’s ‘strategic patience’ ineffective"]
