Check Out Our Sports Photo Galleries Contact Us
Obama’s red line: diplomatic fulcrum for peace
by David Farside
Sep 30, 2013 | 2231 views | 1 1 comments | 112 112 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Much to the chagrin of most republican war–hawks, extreme right-wingers and politicians who pray every day at the alter of the U.S. Senate and the tabernacle of Congress for our country’s failure; President Obama has demonstrated his ability to be a peacemaker, negotiator and successful Commander in Chief of our divided, dysfunctional nation.

When Obama warned the government of Syria they would be crossing a red line if they used chemical weapons against revolutionaries, fighting for a democratic form of government, some republicans criticized his warnings and said he was leading us into another war in the Mid East. Others jumped at the chance to engage us in a war against Syria. Some even called for his impeachment, claiming his so-called red line will be the cause of war. And then there were the Benghazi-ites. You know, the ones who could do nothing for three months except blame Obama for a terrorist attack of our Embassy in Benghazi. What they need is another dead horse to beat. Maybe they could find an elephant grazing in their own backyard; or better yet, they could pick the bones of a few dead elephants left by President Obama on the steps of the Whitehouse.

What a difference just a few weeks makes in foreign policy. Thanks to the diplomacy of Obama, Syria has volunteered to destroy its stockpile of chemical weapons; and just hours after the U.N. Security Council, which includes Russia, agreed to eliminate Syria’s chemical weapons, Russia pledged troops to guard storage facilities under the direction and watchful eyes of the United Nations. That may seem like the fox guarding the hen house, but it will work.  

Obama detractors claimed his red line would push Iran to challenge our resolve and would clearly lead us into war with Hassan Rouhani, Iran’s President. But Obama’s olive branch of diplomacy was accepted by Iran. For the first time in over 30 years, a leader of Iran has had a one-on-one conversation with an American President. After speaking to the United Nations, where Rouhani acknowledged the holocaust did happen and condemned the murder of the Jews and spoke of peaceful co-existence in the region, he spoke to President Obama on the phone and vowed to resolve the impasse pertaining to Iran’s nuclear program. From here, it appears Obama’s red line strategy is working.

President Obama took a calculated risk when he announced his red line policy dealing with Syria, Iran and the rest of the Mid East. But it’s not the first time a Democratic president drew the line regarding weapons of war.

In 1962, President Kennedy told the nation the Soviet Union was installing ballistic missiles with nuclear bomb capabilities in Cuba. He warned Russia and Cuba of a preemptive nuclear attack if the missiles were not removed. The missiles were removed. The red line was never crossed and we’ve been punishing Cuba for over 50 years. But Obama’s red line is not designed as a punishment — only a diplomatic fulcrum for peace. 

David Farside is a Sparks resident and political activist.
Comments
(1)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Dave J
|
October 20, 2013
The Syrian civil war has been going on for over two years, 100,000 have died and 2,000,000 have become refugees and Obama did nothing. Then when Assad crossed an arbitrary red lime Obama goes from doing nothing to wanting to go to war with Syria. You want diplomacy? That is what we got from Putin, not Obama. Putin deserves the Peace Prize for arranging the chemical disarming of Syria, a peaceful resolution in the face of Obama expanding the war and killing even more civilians.
Featured Businesses