International Empathy, is what we saw today. A truly incredible speech that seeks to draw parallels and commonalities among countries that have grown accustomed to drawing upon historical differences to justify contemporary failures to advance in a more productive direction. President Obama didn’t chafe at those differences, rather he explained them, he empathized with the plight of Israel, and Palestine, and the Muslim world. He articulated the story of America, and made it accessible to those who have been told for far to long that our country is to blame for their grievances. I am proud of the President today, but even more so, I’m inspired to see diplomacy move in this direction and to see empathy emerge as a tenant of President Obama’s administration.
From his 2004 Convention speech as a candidate for the US Senate, to his race speech as a candidate for President, to this speech today as President of the United States- Mr. Obama has aimed to see the world in the eyes of others. No doubt, this approach complicates things, and in many cases good intentions will not be enough. Nonetheless, today marks a new beginning for international diplomacy. Today is when the promise of his Presidency began to come to fruition.
“The thing that I consider to be my most profound obligation, is keeping the American people safe”.
Obama indicates that he’s open to a Congressional review of the Bush torture memos released last week. Still, he remains steadfast in his belief that if anyone is going to be prosecuted, it’s going to be those who made the legal arguments that permitted such heinous acts rather than the individuals who committed the acts themselves.
The Obama administration has indicated that they will soon be declassifying and releasing “ugly” torture memos that detail the Bush administrations approach to using water boarding and other coercive measures to extract information from enemy combatants. (The Obama administration also recently announced that they are abandoning the term enemy combatants)
These articles remind me of something that I heard a former Presidential speech writer say at a meeting this past summer. The conversation was off the record, but suffice it to say that the individual is a political legend who suggested that in order to avoid inflaming an already polarized Washington that a President Obama should avoid pressing charges, or even investigating Bush administration abuses. The individual suggested that this was a matter to be deliberated and decided by international courts. I haven’t heard many people echo that sentiment, and while I agree that it’s important to unmask abuses so as to prevent them from being repeated in the future, I also realize that President Obama doesn’t have the political capital, or quite frankly the luxury to make this a center point of his administration. Pundits are already criticizing his administration for taking on too much too quickly, this is such a hot button issue- I just don’t see how this is something that the administration can take on right now.
This is a pretty big headline. President Obama signals an openness to reaching out to more moderate elements of the Taliban.
I do have qualms with some portions of the article though- this passage for instance:
The president spoke at length about the struggle with terrorism in Afghanistan and elsewhere, staking out positions that at times seemed more comparable to those of his predecessor than many of Mr. Obama’s more liberal supporters would like. He did not rule out the option of snatching terrorism suspects out of hostile countries.
Yeah, the President articulated that position in the Spring of 2007 and then was rebuked for it by Democrats and Republicans alike and then was vindicated when the CIA pursued that exact strategy in 2008. If countries are unwilling or unable to pursue terrorists, then the United States is willing to strike them in their stead. It’s extremely controversial but it’s nothing new- and it’s not the President moving to the center after getting elected which is what this passage seems to suggest.
On the campaign, the statement was made with regards to Pakistan but in the NY Times interview he seems to be opening up the parameters of this position to include other countries as well.
More after the jump… Continue reading
