Obama, Clinton, Mitchell: US Appeasement Policy
Posted in Public Affairs, Israel, Hezbollah, Iraq, wordpress, Politics, Democrats, Clinton, Afghanistan, Pakistan, North Korea, Nuke, U.N., United States, Russia, China, India, Iran, Hamas, Palestine, obama, hillary, Foreign Affairs, Abbas, Fatah, Putin on October 15th, 2009 by Stanford Matthews 


While the recent decision by the Nobel committee to award the 2009 peace prize to President Obama focused more attention on the US leader no more will be said about it in this post. US diplomatic strategy, success or failure, foreign policy and the role of the US State Dept and White House will be. All the talk about rebuilding America’s image, hope and change, a nuclear free world and ends to conflict needs a reality check. How are things going so far?
Not necessarily in order of importance what is on most peoples’ minds these days in terms of international relations or foreign affairs? From the US perspective the countries of note would include Russia, China, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, North Korea and Iran. Of course the perennial favorites not yet mentioned would be any country in the Middle East. Israel and its neighbors are still without solutions. Russia and China are still vying for top dog honors with the US on the world stage. Upstarts Iran and North Korea at the very least want a seat at the cool kids table. So nothing much has changed.
Here’s a brief recap of events in US diplomatic strategy with a ‘new’ President and Secretary of State.
Still no progress in Palestinian/Israeli peace talks
Not a surprise to see a headline expressing failure in Middle East diplomacy no matter who is involved.
What about Iran?
Putin Says Iran Sanctions Talk Premature
And the view from the US Secretary of State…..
This is merely a continuation of the impotent international community’s response to Iran’s nuclear weapons program that was essentially confirmed again with yet another lie exposed with admission of the previously hidden enrichment facility already known to the Obama Administration. And no one will visit the plant until later this month. Like that will solve anything.
Which makes this next sham almost laughable if it wasn’t so pathetic.
Obama to Preside at UN Security Council
By Margaret Besheer
The United Nations
Another rhetorical masterpiece expressing the desire for a nuclear free world without the substance to support such a notion. The exclamation point is provided by the appeasement strategy reminiscent of a similar process that helped usher in WWII.
And what was the defining achievement by press accounts for the SoS Hillary Rodham Clinton?
Hillary Clinton Helps Turkey, Armenia Open Border - ABC News
Clinton uses diplomatic muscle in Turkey-Armenia row | Politics …
Turkey, Armenia Agree to Ties; Clinton’s Skill Tested (Update1 …
The Daily Star - Politics - Clinton hails Turkey, Armenia steps …
Clinton Helps Save Historic Turkey, Armenia Accord - International …
A more accurate appraisal of Clinton’s participation may be the following…..
Clinton to Attend Turkey-Armenia Normalization Deal Signing
By David Gollust
State Department
A simple visit to the US State Dept website would bear this out. At least in terms of demonstrating that this State Dept is essentially no different from any other feeble attempt by heads of state to display their conviction to foreign relations or determination to improve conditions in the world. A visit to the website while producing this post featured the following items:
Positive Future for U.S.-Russian Relations
Finding Common Ground With Russia
Secretary Clinton Travels to Europe
U.S. Supports Peace in Northern Ireland
U.S. Supports Emergence of Afghan Government
U.S.-U.K. Advancing Shared Values
U.S.-Ireland Working Together
and travel puff pieces?
So much for the hope and change of a new administration in the US and statements expressed to suggest foreign policy would be successful.
Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com



Over the years many published reports indicate terrorism is fostered in the West Bank and Gaza for the high unemployment, predominantly youthful population with no opportunity and a crowded populace living in poverty and dire conditions. Then how did Abbas calculate they would need $2.8 billion to rebuild Gaza? How does Clinton determine $300 million in aid will make Gaza peaceful and responsible? And then there are 75 ‘donor’ nations meeting to raise more money. The better question is how smart do you have to be to realize if you launch rockets against Israel long enough to force retaliation after the smoke clears you will receive billions of dollars to do with as you please? The secondary question is this. If Gaza is so bleak and suffering from deplorable conditions why would it cost that much to rebuild and why do the Palestinians need wads of cash to ‘cover a budget’ and for ‘institutional reforms and economic development’? Is this the first time they have ever received money in this manner? No.




For those who feel inspired to criticize Israel for military action against rocket attack from Hamas the following excerpt and link is provided as the first in the chronology presented in this post. 
Expected: Jewish groups criticizing others for meeting with the Iranian President. Unexpected: other religious groups meeting with the Iranian President. While one might not reasonably expect everyone to hold the same opinion on Iran on every issue, recognizing Ahmadinejad’s call for the destruction of Israel and therefore condemning the Iranian Preisdent and refusing to meet with him should be SOP for religious groups as well as political leaders. Since Ahmadinejad has been compared to Hitler it is not a stretch to view some recent events as similar to the coddling manner by which many also treated Hitler during his rise to power in Germany. And we all know what happened then.

Nixon’s legacy included the milestone of opening dialogue with China and historic visits by the West to the mysterious and isolated region of the world. Carter’s often criticized administration had what appeared as a Middle East peace effort that came closer than any other at resolving the conflicts. Reagan convinced the Soviet Union to ‘tear down this wall’. Much about President Bush these days points to the near obsession of American Presidents to push for their legacy in the fading hours of their Presidency. Beyond victory in the war in Iraq, President Bush’s latest call for Middle East peace talks presents among other things, his search for a legacy.
Understandably, some in the Middle East are wary or even suspicious of Tony Blair’s involvement. Of all the people on the planet likely to have a role to play in the search for Middle East peace, Tony Blair probably has the best chance of providing a sense of genuine sincerity and honesty to the task at hand. But the baggage of his history with President Bush and some indications he bears his own separate agenda on solving this never ending crisis may sabotage his ability to assist before it really begins.
And no one should overlook the complications provided by the most suspected opposition to any peace in the region, none other than the President of Iran. A meeting between Iran, Syria and Hamas is nothing more than a strategy session of those opposing peace efforts in the Middle East.