The State of the Union and Foreign Policy

January 26, 2012

Nicholas Berry

Foreign policy did not play a major role in President Obama’s annual address. According to the Washington Post, only ten minutes of his hour-long address – six minutes on foreign policy and four on the military – dealt with international issues.

It was a campaign speech, after all, and the economy, jobs in particular, is the most important issue for the American people and so became the most important issue for the President. He appeared reasonable, stressing common sense in urging policies that would create a more equitable society, a more educated populace, and more jobs. The contrast with his likely opponent, whether Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich, was barely below the surface when he championed the middle class.

What little he said about national security also contrasted with his more military-oriented opponents.

He began his address by citing how he brought home the troops from Iraq and started withdrawals from Afghanistan and approved the raid that brought down Osama bin Laden. “One of my proudest possessions is the flag that the SEAL team took with them on the mission to get bin Laden. On it are each of the names. Some may be Democrats. Some may be Republicans. But that doesn’t matter” Obama acknowledged he plans to cut $480 billion from the military budget over ten years, but pledged to “maintain the finest military in the world.” There would also be a continued partnership with Afghanistan to prevent that country from ever again being a “source of attacks against America.” His preference for active diplomacy underscored this segment of his address.

He briefly mentioned his pivot to Asia, the country’s “ironclad commitment” to Israel’s security, the good news from events in Burma, and his belief that Syria’s Bashar al-Assad’s days in power are numbered.

Iran received a bit more commentary. Obama reiterated that he “will take no options off the table” to prevent that country from developing a nuclear weapon. “But a peaceful resolution of this issue is still possible, and far better,” he pointed out. After noting that “the renewal of American leadership can be felt across the globe,” he concluded that notion by stating that “anyone who tells you that America is in decline or that our influence has waned doesn’t know what they are talking about.”

What conclusions can be drawn from his brief and already-familiar remarks on foreign policy?
The first is that, because his election opponents have not emphasized foreign policy issues on their attacks on Obama’s administration, the president has a relatively free hand in managing international relations. He can appear above the fray, very presidential and in command.

But to keep this favorable situation, Obama cannot risk uncertain policy initiatives that may, if they fail, would give campaign fodder to his opposition in a tight election year. Thus, we can’t expect a new push on Middle East peace, one that would inevitably irritate the Israelis and their supporters here. Strenuous diplomatic efforts will be made to work with the international community to prevent Iran from weaponizing, based on a potential deal for reduced sanctions on Iran in return for intrusive inspections that would ensure that the Islamic Republic only use its nuclear program for energy. All options may be on the table – a genuflection to coercive diplomacy – but intense efforts will be made to keep the issue non-military. Obama is serious about non-militarizing American foreign policy. He knows the costs of military adventures that have torpedoed presidents in the past, including Truman, Johnson, Carter, and severely diminished the legacy of George W. Bush. He also knows the damage these chief executives have done to the American economy, military personnel, and standing in the world.

Obama will look for achievements on less-risky matters, such as on trade, arms control, counterterrorism, counter-piracy, and on encouraging human rights and democracy. There will undoubtedly be a good measure of symbolic events denoting America’s – and Obama’s – leadership in the world, with visits, summits, and diplomatic accords (a further opening to Cuba may occur, altering what most experts see as one of America’s most anachronistic, stupid foreign policies).

In short, foreign policy will not be the centerpiece of his final year of his first term. The election will hinge on the unemployment rate, consumer confidence, the stock market trend, and which candidate is seen as having answers for the restoration of the American economy.

Nicholas Berry is Director of Foreign Policy Forum