Posts Tagged ‘Barack Obama’

… they can’t say we Obama never tried:

The Obama administration has decided to press for the establishment of a U.N. commission of inquiry to probe allegations of human rights abuses by Burma’s military regime, marking a retreat from earlier American efforts to engage the reclusive government.

The decision reflects mounting frustration that nearly two years of diplomatic outreach, including several visits by senior American diplomats to Burma, have failed to persuade the country’s military ruler, Senior Leader Than Shwe, to release Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, Aung San Suu Kyi, from house arrest or to allow the political opposition to participate in the country’s upcoming election.

Turtle Bay / Foreign Policy: An end to engagement? U.S. to push for Burma inquiry.

President Barack Obama came into office committed to reducing tensions with Iran and transforming the troubled relationship between the two countries by offering an outstretched hand and an open dialogue with that country’s leaders. These are, of course, laudable goals that remain on the table. Ironically, however, if diplomacy is to still have a chance and he is to achieve these goals, Obama will also have to convince Tehran that his outstretched hand can be formed into a fist.

Foreign Policy: It’s Time to Get Tough on Iran

In der Außenpolitik beschränkt sich das Land immer mehr auf eine verwaltende Funktion. Modern ist gerade die Einsicht, dass man den Terror nicht ändern wird und sich deshalb wieder auf staatliche Bedrohungen konzentrieren solle. Die Formel steht für einen neuen, resignierten Isolationismus.

(SZ: Der amerikanische Patient)

An It girl or It-girl is a charming, sexy young woman who receives intense media coverage unrelated or disproportional to personal achievements.

(Wikipedia)

Mr Obama becomes the third sitting US President to receive the prize. The committee said today that he had “captured the world’s attention”. It is certainly true that his energy and aspirations have dazzled many of his supporters. Sadly, it seems they have so bedazzled the Norwegians that they can no longer separate hopes from achievement. The achievements of all previous winners have been diminished.

Times Online: Absurd decision on Obama makes a mockery of the Nobel peace prize

Realpolitik ohne Rücksicht auf Verluste – made by the Obama-Administration (via/via):

Nachtrag: Einen Tag später rudert das Weiße Haus zurück; man ist sich der Tragweite des Fehlers bewußt geworden. In den Worten von Robert Gibbs:

Well, let me correct a little bit of what I said yesterday. I denoted that Mr. Ahmadinejad was the elected leader of Iran. I would say it’s not for me to pass judgment on. He’s been inaugurated, that’s a fact. Whether any election was fair, obviously the Iranian people still have questions about that and we’ll let them decide that. But I would simply say he’s been inaugurated and we know that is simply a fact.

Mehr: Gibbs walks back Ahmadinejad recognition.

Certainly we have no desire or ability to intrude massive forces into Iran or any other country to determine the outcome of domestic political issues. This is something that we have no intention of ever doing in another country. We’ve tried this once in Vietnam. It didn’t work, as you well know.

(Barack Obama Jimmy Carter)

When Ronald Reagan went before the Brandenburg Gate, he did not say Mr. (Mikhail) Gorbachev, that wall is none of our business.

(Mike Pence)

United States House of Representatives condemns Theran crackdown on Protesters (via):

WASHINGTON (AP) – In the strongest message yet from the U.S. government, the House voted 405-1 Friday to condemn Tehran’s crackdown on demonstrators and the government’s interference with Internet and cell phone communications.

The resolution was initiated by Republicans as a veiled criticism of President Barack Obama, who has been reluctant to criticize Tehran’s handling of disputed elections that left hard-liner President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in power.

Btw: Who the fuck is Ron Paul?

Nachtrag: Das Weiße Haus will von einer Klatsche nichts wissen:

Shortly after the House vote on Friday afternoon, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said the resolution’s language is “very consistent” with what President Obama has said since the chaos began.

“Obviously, we welcome the resolution,” Gibbs said, adding that he believes “that it echoes the words of President Obama throughout the week.”

Except that’s a lie: the White House has not condemned the Iranian regime. Perhaps someone should ask the president personally to do so.

Change: Obama und John Kerry bemühen sich um ein neues Verhältnis mit den sudanesischen Schlächtern:

The new U.S. special envoy to Sudan, Scott Gration, who is currently touring the country, made an unusually positive statement on his arrival in Khartoum last week, telling reporters he was looking for friendship and cooperation from the Sudanese government.

The chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, John Kerry, will lead a delegation to Sudan’s Darfur region, U.S. officials said on Monday, in a possible sign of a growing willingness to engage with Khartoum.

“This is significant,” a U.S. diplomatic source told Reuters. “It is the first Congressional delegation to Sudan we have had since 2007. Like the U.S. envoy’s current visit, it is a new tack.”

Mehr bei Reuters: Senator to make rare Darfur visit (via).

Oder: Früher war auch nicht alles schlecht.

DIE WELT über den Nachfolger von Peter Struck:

Der Verteidigungsminister Franz Josef Jung reist in einer Zeit nach Afghanistan, in der allerorten nach Wegen gesucht wird, das Land vor einem erneuten Abgleiten zu bewahren. Auf die Ansprüche von außen reagiert er gelassen: „Wir führen keinen Krieg, und darum müssen wir auch keinen gewinnen.”

DIE ZEIT über den Nachfolger von George W. Bush:

Die USA haben unter Obama neue Prioritäten in der Außenpolitik gesetzt. So soll die Truppenpräsenz in Afghanistan deutlich verstärkt werden, Einheiten werden aus dem Irak an den Hindukusch verlegt. [...]

Zunächst begrüßten amerikanische Generäle Obamas Strategie für den Irak. Doch die heftigen Terroranschläge der vergangene Tage haben hochrangige US-Militärs umdenken lassen. Um die Parlamentswahl im Dezember abzusichern, sei eine starke US-Streitmacht im Irak erforderlich, sagte Generalleutnant Lloyd Austin, der zweithöchste amerikanische Soldat im Irak. Er lehnt einen weiteren Abzug ab.

Auch der Kommandeur für die Truppen im Irak, Ray Odierno, und der Oberbefehlshaber für den Nahen Osten, David Petraeus, sprachen sich Ende Februar für einen langsameren Abzug aus, um die Sicherheitslage nicht weiter zu verschlechtern. [...]

Selbst die Süddeutsche kann es nicht mehr ignorieren:

Ein anderer Name dürfte derweil für die Taktik stehen, mit der Washington künftig in den Schluchten des Hindukusch vorankommen will: David Petraeus. Der Vier-Sterne-General, inzwischen der Chef des US-Zentralkommandos, gilt als Vater von Amerikas spätem Erfolg [!] im Irak. Petraeus will, getreu seinem Lehrbuch zur erfolgreichen Aufstandsbekämpfung, mit mehr amerikanischen Soldaten in Afghanistan erneut in die Schlacht ziehen. Mehr Bodentruppen verheißen, zumindest vorübergehend, mehr Blutvergießen – aber hoffentlich weniger blindes Bomben per Drohnen wie bisher.

Der Irak als Lektion für Afghanistan: Obama mag es nicht so sagen, aber er wird es tun. Er will, um seinen guten Krieg zu gewinnen, jetzt vom schlechten Krieg das Siegen lernen.

Aus: Obamas Engagement für Afghanistan – Amerikas guter Krieg.

Auf der SAVE DARFUR Webseite findet sich eine deutliche Erklärung von allen drei verbliebenen Präsidentschaftskandidaten:

As we campaign for President of the United States over the next several months, we expect there to be significant focus on the many differences between us. After all, elections are about choices in a free society. We have had a spirited contest so far and fully expect a robust debate about issues foreign and domestic right up to Election Day.

[...]

Today, we wish to make clear to the Sudanese government that on this moral issue of tremendous importance, there is no divide between us. We stand united and demand that the genocide and violence in Darfur be brought to an end and that the CPA be fully implemented. Even as we campaign for the presidency, we will use our standing as Senators to press for the steps needed to ensure that the United States honors, in practice and in deed, its commitment to the cause of peace and protection of Darfur’s innocent citizenry. We will continue to keep a close watch on events in Sudan and speak out for its marginalized peoples. It would be a huge mistake for the Khartoum regime to think that it will benefit by running out the clock on the Bush Administration. If peace and security for the people of Sudan are not in place when one of us is inaugurated as President on January 20, 2009, we pledge that the next Administration will pursue these goals with unstinting resolve.

Die ganze Erklärung findet man hier: WE STAND UNITED ON SUDAN.