Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

karynnj

(59,475 posts)
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 12:46 PM Nov 2013

Are journalists creating a negative view of Obama tby creating foreign policy dissention narratives?

Yesterday, there was a thread that headlined that John Kerry defied the "White House" on policy in Egypt. The story actually said that he took the advise of the state department experts rather than that of Susan Rice and her staff. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=339836

Yesterday, as many would have guessed I responded angrily "defending" John Kerry. This morning, I decided to actually look to see what Obama and Rice have said publicly on Egypt. The results is that I think that this article was written mostly to stir things up - and maybe to cast a negative view of Obama himself as "disinterested" in foreign policy. Something that absolutely is not true of a President, who immediately joined the SFRC in Congress. It also is an effort to diminish Kerry by placing as truth that Rice = WH and defines foreign policy. In fact, OBAMA defines foreign policy and both Kerry and Rice are insiders and advisers. (Note that the writer of this also wrote when Rice became NSA that she was effectively the boss of the SoS - which is completely false. If it were, Bush demoted Condi Rice and the world saw it as a promotion!

Here is what I found:
1) Here is a recent interview - done in the US - where among other things Rice speaks of Egypt.
[div class ="excerpt"]
"For example, on Egypt: the Saudi view has been that the interim government, which came to power through some ambiguous events, to put it diplomatically, ought to have the complete and unreserved endorsement of the United States no matter what actions it takes," she explained, referring to the Egyptian military's ouster of Mohammed Morsi, the country's democratically elected president, over the summer.

"Well, we think what happened in July was ambiguous," she continued. "We recognize that even though a democratic government was removed, that that removal came with the support of the vast, vast majority of Egyptians, who had grown frustrated with the misgovernance and core policies of the Muslim Brotherhood. We have tried to indicate to the Egyptian people and the Egyptian government that we support them in their transition back to an elected, democratic government."

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/11/susan-rice-on-opposition-to-iran-talks-its-premature-to-judge/281440/

What is clear is that there is almost no light between her comments and Kerry's -- and his were made in Egypt to the government. Kerry DID make the same push that they return to a path towards democracy.

2) Here is an article on the review of Middle East policy that is referred to. Unlike the massive review Obama had on Afghanistan including the SoS, SoD, the joint chiefs and his staff - this was Rice and her aides. This was before the UN session. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/27/world/middleeast/rice-offers-a-more-modest-strategy-for-mideast.html?_r=0

To me, the BEST way to assess this is what Obama said about our policy at the UN. What is clear is that he prioritized Iran, Israel/Palestine and the Syrian mess. It seems reasonable to assume that, given this set of priorities, it is VERY unlikely that he would want the SoS to do anything other than what he did in Egypt. As to Rice, I would bet that since she said as little as she did on Morsi, it likely is that she sees it as counterproductive or she is following Obama's lead.

3) What I saw in Kerry's very difficult ME trip, is that he made very strong statements that both Saudi Arabia and Israel did not want to hear. This suggests that he is not loathe to state unpleasant truths to leaders. However those comments were with regards to Iran negotiations, Syria and settlements - all related to Obama's stated priorities - and coincidentally all things he is most involved in. Here is a link on Saudi Arabia comments:

[div class = "excerpt"]
In what may have been the frankest description to date of administration views, Kerry said at the news conference that “absent a negotiated solution, we don’t see a lot of ways to end the violence that are implementable or palatable to us, because we don’t have the legal authority or justification or the desire, at this point, to get in the middle of the civil war.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/kerry-meets-with-saudi-king-abdullah-amid-policy-differences-on-mideast-issues/2013/11/04/4dbf204a-4554-11e3-a196-3544a03c2351_story_1.html

In Israel, Kerry hit back very hard the day after Netanyahu claimed, with Kerry next to him, that Abbas had agreed to the settlements in exchange for prisoners. This - if unchallenged - would likely end the peace talks and endanger Abbas. It is easy to guess that Netanyahu wanted the Palestinians to leave the talks and get all the blame that he was already giving them. Here is a transcript of Kerry's interview on Israel TV - http://www.israelpolicyforum.org/blog/john-kerry-interview-israels-channel-2-news

In conclusion, what I see is that Obama is clearly leading the effort on foreign policy. He is also clearly making very big changes from past US policies and taking on some very ambitious challenges. What I suspect is that there are people scared of change or who still support past policies. This is most obvious in Iran and Israel, but in Syria - there also is a shift as well.

Ironically, McCain - in what he intended as a criticism - may be right. John Kerry, may proudly be a wrecking ball - with Obama's support and agreement - to old US positions that McCain holds dear. Obama's actions are not those of PNAC.

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Are journalists creating a negative view of Obama tby creating foreign policy dissention narratives? (Original Post) karynnj Nov 2013 OP
One kick to try to get some comments on something that karynnj Nov 2013 #1
Yes, it is the same thing they did to Kerry in 2004. Major Hogwash Nov 2013 #2
Here, I think the damage is likely more real for Obama, than Kerry karynnj Nov 2013 #3
The real damage is to journalism, not to President Obama. Major Hogwash Nov 2013 #4
Thanks for this candid discussion - I need to give it a lot more thought karynnj Nov 2013 #5

karynnj

(59,475 posts)
1. One kick to try to get some comments on something that
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 01:11 PM
Nov 2013

I know is less interesting than political fights, but which may be important.

karynnj

(59,475 posts)
3. Here, I think the damage is likely more real for Obama, than Kerry
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 01:33 PM
Nov 2013

At this point, he will ultimately be judged by what he actually does and he is doing an excellent job. I think the greater damage is to Obama as it is playing into a very untrue Republican meme that he really is not engaged.

Obama is already dealing with negatives because of the ACA problems. One sign that the Republican lies are working is that in a poll, the question on whether Obama is honest has swung dramatically with maybe with many believing that he "lied" on keeping your plan. In fact, the design of the plan WAS to keep most people in the employer insurance they had - the same insurance that for many of us could (and did) often change drastically from year to year.

I suspect that part of why most President's fall in the second term is that there is already a hidden realignment for the future - and some highly partisan people know that he will not run again - thus if they are unhappy they say so.

I suspect they are trying to insure that Obama is not able to have major foreign policy accomplishments.



Major Hogwash

(17,656 posts)
4. The real damage is to journalism, not to President Obama.
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 03:14 PM
Nov 2013

History will record how President Obama dealt with this nation's problems, while the Rethuglicans in Congress went completely overboard to thwart implementing any solutions at all.

What the Rethuglicans in the House have done for the last 5 years has caused them to be the least effective House in the entire history of the United States.

While the Rethuglicans in the Senate set a record for filibusters by filibustering, or threatening to filibuster, more than 400 times in the last 5 years.
Almost half of all of the filibusters that have ever occured in the Senate in the entire history of the United States have taken place since President Obama has been the President!!

For the most part, the immigration reform package that President Obama has talked about for the last 5 years is the same one that the Rethuglicans were spouting 20 years ago.
Just like how his health care plan, the ACA, is for the most part, the same plan the Rethuglican's proposed more than 20 years ago.

President Obama is dismantling the phony baloney Reagan legacy piece by piece, the one that the corrupt, corporatist mainstream journalists have written about for the last 30 years.

President Obama grew up under President Reagan, and he knows what a phony bs artist Reagan was, and how the mainstream media of the day fawned over Reagan.
President Obama knows more about foreign policy than Reagan ever did simply because Reagan was just a B-rate actor that never traveled outside of this country, much less ever lived outside of this country's borders.

President Obama's legacy will not be one of few accomplishments, or failures, or even missed opportunities.
His legacy will be remembered for the way he exposed the Rethuglican party and that will end their chances to get back in to the White House for the next 30 years.

Just as Bush's invasion of Iraq, and how the horrendous tragedy that occured at the Abu Ghraib prison will create more Al Queda terrorists for the next 50 years because their generation of children grew up with foreign invaders in their country torturing their people -- the Tea Party coalition of the Rethuglican party, the predictable, kneejerk reaction the white supremacists within the GOP had to a Black man being elected to the office of the President, will cause the current American generation of children to see the Rethuglicans for what they really are.

Those children will never forget how President Obama was treated by the Rethuglican party while he was the President of the United States.
Just as we remember JFK 50 years later when we were kids back then, those kids will remember President Obama.

Maybe all those kids wanted was just "free stuff".

Or maybe the truth really is what they really wanted was their parents to be able to get jobs, or maybe they wanted their parents to be able to keep their homes and not be evicted, or maybe they only wanted the chance to have Pell grants when they entered college after they grew up.
For whatever reasons they will have, this current generation of American children under the age of 18 will never vote for a Rethuglican to occupy the White House.

That's the true legacy of the Tea Party coalition of the Rethuglican party.
They taught our children that they can't be trusted to run the federal government!!

Aided by the mainstream media, the Tea Party has a had a fairly smooth ride, so far.
But, the blowback is coming.
The pendulum is swinging the other way.

Just as it did in Iraq after Bush invaded Iraq, the blowback in our country is building up.
Just like a kettle on a hot stove, it is so hot that the lid is almost bouncing off of the kettle . . . just before it blows clear off.

The mainstream media has hated John Kerry for over 30 years because of what he is . . a true American statesman.
A patriot.
A true patriot, not some phony, fake, fat-assed white guy wearing a 3-cornered hat spouting off boolshit about how we needed to invade Iraq to protect our freedom!!!

karynnj

(59,475 posts)
5. Thanks for this candid discussion - I need to give it a lot more thought
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 03:24 PM
Nov 2013

It is good to think that the kids of today may think of Obama as we think of JFK. It does take guts to do as he does - one thing after another - not waiting for the press to applaud.

I think you are correct as far as Kerry goes. However one look at his face shows that he is doing now what he is working to make the world better and his happiness shows through - even when things are bad.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Are journalists creating ...