U.S.

May 5, 2014

Obama’s inaction invites challenges to the U.S.

In the Philippines this week, President Obama took a cheap shot at critics of his foreign policy.

“Why is it,” the president pondered at a news conference, “that everybody is so eager to use military force after we’ve just gone through a decade of war at enormous costs to our troops and to our budget?”

But who is banging the shield, demanding war? Critics of the president’s foreign policy have ranged from human rights activists on the political left to congressional Republicans on the right.

No one is eager for a new war. Indeed, the worry in many circles is that the president’s foreign policy has been so provocatively feeble that we risk war through our own indecision.

Rather than acknowledge this legitimate anxiety, the president has created a dynamic in which he bravely confronts political opponents who don’t exist.

On the world stage, inertia has consequences. And we have felt the consequences across the globe. Storms clouds are forming in some regions, lightning is striking in others. I worry that those storms might eventually reach our shores.

One of those regions is Syria. The Syrian civil war started in Obama’s first term. He had a variety of tools at his disposal, such as arming moderate rebel factions and restoring the U.S. military posture in the Mediterranean, that could have prevented Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s use of chemical weapons or even shortened the conflict.

The president didn’t use these tools, but he did declare that the use of chemical weapons against civilians there would be a “red line.” When Assad ignored this warning, Obama seesawed between punitive military action and more rhetoric. He came to Congress with a request that it authorize military force, backing down when it became clear he didn’t have the votes.

So much for the idea that “everybody is so eager to use military force.” After his policy failures backed him into a corner, it was the president who went looking for a fight — not his critics. The criticism isn’t that the president failed to send the Marines into Syria but rather that he allowed the situation to degrade to the point where military force was needed.

Asia, meanwhile, is the Balkan powder keg of the 21st century. The region is undergoing a multinational arms race spawned by Chinese territorial distension. Beijing has staked claim to territory that isn’t China’s and is building up the military capacity to take and hold it.

The president’s decision to pivot to Asia was correct, but — like our allies — I fear the pivot itself is on paper only. The Navy is losing ships faster than we can build them. The Air Force is set to lose 500 combat aircraft in the next few years. We are cutting tens of thousands of soldiers and Marines from our forces. We still refuse to ship Taiwan modernized military equipment and failed in both the George W. Bush and Obama administrations to send Japan top-line military equipment such as the F-22 Raptor.

Again, the criticism here isn’t that the president has failed to start a war in Asia but that he is allowing the situation to disintegrate to the point where war may become reality.

In Ukraine, Obama promised assistance to the embattled government. A blue moon later, the administration got around to sending some military rations and sleeping bags.

Yet the president is ignoring bipartisan sentiment from both the House and Senate — and the advice of former NATO commander Wesley Clark — to send more lifesaving equipment to the Ukrainians. These radios, body armor, night-vision goggles and such could well alter Russian President Vladimir Putin’s calculus.

Next week, the House Armed Services Committee will draft its annual defense bill. In it, we will provide the range of options the president has overlooked. The steps are firm but reasonable. They recognize the utility of intelligence and cyber-cooperation with Ukraine, enhanced military readiness in Europe and a strategic framework for U.S. security cooperation with partners in both Eurasia and Europe.

None of us wants a war with Russia. But, as with the threats in Syria and China, I am deeply worried that Obama’s inaction is fertilizing the European soil for wider conflict.

Increasing violence in Iraq, provocations by North Korea and an ongoing Iranian nuclear program stem from similar paralysis in the Oval Office. I believe that these growing threats to peace spring from the same source: the perception that the White House is too timid when challenged.

Our adversaries have tested us repeatedly. They have concluded that this administration will avoid any sensible precaution, any defensive deployment, any hike in military preparedness, because it believes any show of strength is akin to starting a war or desiring a war.

That sentiment is precarious, and we have watched it subvert the international order for six years now. Let’s hope it doesn’t take a war for the Obama administration to wake from its slumber.

 

Editor’s note: McKeon, a Republican, represents California’s 25th District in the House, where he chairs the Armed Services Committee. This commentary first appeared in the May 1 edition of the Washington Post.




All of this week's top headlines to your email every Friday.


 
 

 

Headlines April 24, 2015

News: More than $1 billion in U.S. emergency reconstruction aid goes missing in Afghanistan - A total of $1.3 billion that the Pentagon shipped to its force commanders in Afghanistan between 2004 and 2014 for the most critical reconstruction projects can’t be accounted for by the Defense Department, 60 percent of all such spending under an...
 
 

News Briefs April 24, 2015

German defense minister: widely used rifle has no future A widely used assault rifle has “no future” with the German military in its current form, Germany’s defense minister said April 22, escalating a dispute over the weapon’s alleged shortcomings. Ursula von der Leyen said last month that a study showed the G36 rifle has a...
 
 
Army photograph

Composites key to tougher, lighter armaments

Army photograph XM-360 test firing at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md., in 2007, is shown. The Army is on the cusp of revolutionizing materials that go into armament construction, making for stronger, lighter and more durable weapo...
 

 

Northrop Grumman signs long-term agreement with Raytheon

Northrop Grumman has entered a long-term agreement with Raytheon to supply its LN-200 Inertial Measurement Unit for Raytheon optical targeting systems. The long-term agreement with Raytheon’s Space and Airborne Systems business extends through 2018. The LN-200 provides camera stabilization on optical targeting systems that conduct long-range surveillance and target acquisition for various...
 
 

NTTR supports first F-35B integration into USMC’s weapons school exercise

The Nevada Test and Training Range was part of history April 21, when four U.S. Marine Corps-assigned F-35B Lightning IIs participated in its first Marine Corps’ Final Exercise of the Weapons and Tactics Instructor course on the NTTR’s ranges. The Final Exercise, or FINEX, is the capstone event to the U.S. Marine Corps Marine Aviation...
 
 
AAR-Textron

AAR awarded new contract from Bell Helicopter Textron to support T64 engines

AAR announced April 22 that Bell Helicopter Textron Inc. awarded its Defense Systems & Logistics business unit a contract providing warehouse and logistics services in support of upgrading T64 engines for the Bell V-280 Val...
 




0 Comments


Be the first to comment!


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>