At
last Obama has secured his ‘legacy’ and in the most unusual and unexpected circumstances.
Perhaps
the most serious criticisms levied against him relate to foreign policy. Obama’s foreign policy has
been not to have one. Under his stewardship, America has progressively
withdrawn from the world, leaving an open field for China and Russia.
And
yet his legacy will be two historic foreign policy ‘triumphs’.
First
up is Cuba.
For
56 years the two countries have been scowling and snarling at each other. The
American posture has been diplomatic lunacy. It embargoed all trade, including that
by foreign companies with American interests. It banned travel between the two countries.
It ended all diplomatic relations.
It
banned oil exports, leaving Russia with an open goal to supply Cuba in an
oil-for-sugar barter agreement that allowed Russia to establish a major
foothold in the Caribbean and threated American security and interests throughout
Latin America.
Most
disastrously it engendered the Cuban missile crisis which brought the world to
the brink of nuclear war.
Not
only was American policy plain daft; it
was counter-productive. It allowed communism to become entrenched in Cuba by
allowing Castro to use the existential threat from the US to crush any
semblance of dissent.
And
it allowed Castro to present himself to Latin America and the world as the
Hispanic hero who stood-up to the bullying Yanqui.
Now
Obama has begun the process of normalisation. And not before time!
Next
is the Iran deal which might – just – end a stand-off between the two that has lasted
for nearly four decades. There is a wider context than only America. The deal
was endorsed by six world powers and the EU.
Will
it work?
The antis think it a defeat, a
sell-out. Israel calls it ‘an historic disaster’.
There may be considerable substance in
their fears. The regime of the ayatollahs has been characterised by meddling
and mischief-making of the highest order throughout most of the Middle East. It
is interfering in Iraq and Syria, supporting Hizbullah in the Lebanon; and
stirring up trouble in Yemen and Bahrain.
Lifting sanctions will release more money
for fomenting trouble.
The supporters believe that Iran’s
nuclear ambitions will be stymied for 10 to 15 years, by which time re-joining
the world, attracting trade, investment and tourism, bringing prosperity to the
much put-upon population. After all, the regime itself could be threatened by
the worsening of the condition of the people through extended sanctions.
What options do the antis propose?
There seem to be only two; wait for a better deal or war. The first is unlikely
and the West has learnt from its adventures in Iraq that the second makes
matters worse, much worse.
If the deal works it will secure Obama’s
place in history.
But
there is one legacy that he might not wish to remember.
The
British tend to regard some US Presidents with affection (FDR, Ronnie. Ike) or
indifference (Carter).
Obama
is possibly the only POTUS in living memory who has been actively disliked in
the UK. The reasons are not difficult to find.
He
maintains that his grandfather (whom he never knew) was imprisoned and tortured
by the British for his part in the Mau Mau
uprising.
We
are informed that this was the reason why Obama threw out the bust of Winston
Churchill whom he regarded as a colonialist oppressor. The fact that Winnie was
half-American, an honorary American citizen and idolised by most Americans was
of little consequence.
We
regarded this as a studied insult to the British people as a whole.
There
are no records of his being jailed at all, although there is anecdote that he
was locked up for 6 months in 1949. On what charge there is no evidence, but it
could not have been for a Mau Mau connection because the uprising only began three years later, in
1952. He was a Luo. Mau Mau was Kikuyu. He came from western Kenya, far away
from the violence. He was a Muslim. Mau Mau were animists who bound their
supporters by vile oaths.
Most
of the sources for this tale are garbage. One maintains that it was Obama’s
father who was locked up, and that Mao Mao (not Mau Mau) is so-called because
they were followers of Chinese communism.
The
only known ‘atrocity’ was the killing of eleven detainees at the Hola Detention
camp. There was a full enquiry as a result of which all detention camps were
closed.
Then
there was his contemptuous treatment of Gordon Brown when Brown visited him and
the belittling gift of DVDs which were not playable on the UK system anyway.
Finally
there was his outrageous attacks on BP during the immediate aftermath of the
oil rig tragedy when the causes and responsibility were unknown. He made great
play of ‘British Petroleum’ although it has not been called this for years, is
an international company no longer British and the rig was not only under the
auspices of BP America based in Texas but largely managed by Halliburton, Dick
Cheney’s paymaster.
But
never let the truth get in the way of some Brit-bashing.
No comments:
Post a Comment