Obama’s Foreign Policy Legacy Will Be More About Risk Mitigation Than Great Triumphs

A woman holds a placard reading 'Putin, hands off Ukraine' depicting a collage of Russian President Vladimir Putin and Soviet leader Josef Stalin during a demonstration against the attendances of Russian military in Crimea on March 8, 2014 at the Venceslas Square, in Prague.
National Journal
Norm Ornstein
March 12, 2014, 2:33 p.m.

It is not un­com­mon for second-term pres­id­ents to turn more of their at­ten­tion and fo­cus to for­eign policy. Do­mest­ic polit­ics and policy be­come in­creas­ingly frus­trat­ing, as the pres­id­ent’s par­tis­ans in Con­gress hunker down in pre­par­a­tion for a lousy midterm elec­tion, the party’s ideo­lo­gic­al base be­comes more bel­li­ger­ent, and the op­pos­i­tion party gets bolder. The pres­id­ent has had five years or more of en­ga­ging in for­eign af­fairs and with for­eign lead­ers. And the free­dom to act without the con­straints set by do­mest­ic polit­ics and the powers of Con­gress, to move chess pieces on the in­ter­na­tion­al stage, is highly tempt­ing.

Of course, what pres­id­ents want to do on the world stage is move those chess pieces and shape out­comes to make his­tory through great ac­com­plish­ments. That is what Pres­id­ent Obama has in mind with the ne­go­ti­ations over Ir­an’s nukes, the at­tempt to forge an agree­ment between Is­rael and the Palestini­an Au­thor­ity, and, to a less­er de­gree, the Syr­i­an chem­ic­al-weapons agree­ment.

But the harder real­ity is that most of the time the pres­id­ent will spend on for­eign policy in com­ing months will fo­cus on risk mit­ig­a­tion — try­ing to avoid a cata­strophe more than work­ing to cre­ate a tri­umph. That is true in Afgh­anistan, as Ham­id Kar­zai con­tin­ues to ca­reen out of con­trol; in Syr­ia, as Bashar al-As­sad vies with Kim Jong Un for status as the world’s most bru­tal butcher; in Venezuela, as Nicolás Ma­duro des­cends from au­thor­it­ari­an rule in­to sheer thug­gery; in Tur­key, as a thor­oughly cor­rupt Tayyip Er­dogan strips his coun­try of its hard-fought and hard-won demo­crat­ic in­sti­tu­tions and prin­ciples; in the po­ten­tial for ser­i­ous con­flict between China and Ja­pan over the Sen­kaku Is­lands.

Then there is Ukraine. The chal­lenges to the pres­id­ent are for­mid­able, and they start with a lar­ger real­ity: Deal­ing with a li­on’s share of the oth­er crises above — Syr­ia and Ir­an, es­pe­cially — re­quires try­ing to reach agree­ment with Rus­si­an Pres­id­ent Vladi­mir Putin, either to help re­solve them or at least to re­frain from mak­ing them much, much worse. Putin saved the pres­id­ent from a huge em­bar­rass­ment with the in­ter­ven­tion to re­solve Syr­ia’s chem­ic­al-weapons stock­pile, just be­fore the Sen­ate would have voted down his re­quest for au­thor­iz­a­tion to use force to pun­ish As­sad for us­ing the weapons re­peatedly against Syr­i­ans. Rus­sia is a key play­er in the del­ic­ate ne­go­ti­ations with Ir­an over its nuc­le­ar pro­gram. Mo­scow can make the U.S. trans­ition out of Afgh­anistan more pain­ful and dis­rupt­ive, and can be a pos­it­ive or neg­at­ive play­er in ne­go­ti­ations between the Is­rael­is and Palestini­ans.

For those who im­me­di­ately began call­ing for the harshest sanc­tions we can ap­ply against Rus­sia after its out­rageous be­ha­vi­or in Crimea, those con­sid­er­a­tions were nowhere evid­ent. Of course, one can make the case — and it is a power­ful one — that Putin’s Rus­sia will act in its cold, hard self-in­terest no mat­ter what we do to try to ap­pease it or cush­ion any re­ac­tion. But it is also likely that the harder we push, the more Rus­sia will re­spond in a hard and neg­at­ive way in every oth­er area of our in­terest, at least in the short run. And when it comes to Rus­sia and Syr­ia, the short run is ab­so­lutely cru­cial.

Non­ethe­less, it is clear that Putin be­lieves in power and power only. If there is no tough re­sponse to his takeover of Crimea, it will sig­nal to him that there is an open field for fur­ther ag­gress­ive moves, start­ing with, but not likely end­ing with, East­ern Ukraine.

But here comes the second ma­jor chal­lenge for the pres­id­ent: Ser­i­ous moves against Rus­sia be­gin with tough ac­tions against the cor­rupt ol­ig­archs, Putin and his cronies, who run the show, and with severe eco­nom­ic sanc­tions against Rus­sia’s weak eco­nomy. Those are doable — but only with the co­oper­a­tion of our E.U. al­lies. And the Europeans have little stom­ach to do much at all. In Lon­don, where a boom­ing real-es­tate mar­ket has been fueled by Rus­si­an bil­lion­aires buy­ing houses and flats for up to a hun­dred mil­lion pounds (!), and where there is real fear that burst­ing the hous­ing bubble will sink an already pre­cari­ous eco­nomy, there is no chance that the Brits will crack down on travel by the ol­ig­archs or hit them hard in oth­er ways.

Throughout Europe, where trade with Rus­sia is ro­bust, eco­nom­ic sanc­tions would be pain­ful — much more pain­ful than they would be for the United States. Much of Europe de­pends also heav­ily on Rus­si­an oil and nat­ur­al gas.

The third di­lemma for the pres­id­ent has do­mest­ic im­plic­a­tions. A de­clar­a­tion from Obama that the U.S. will be­gin sig­ni­fic­ant ex­ports of nat­ur­al gas, along with ramp­ing up nat­ur­al-gas pro­duc­tion, would be pain­ful to Rus­sia. To be sure, li­que­fy­ing the gas and ship­ping it by con­tain­er is no equi­val­ent to the pipelines bring­ing the gas to European coun­tries from Rus­sia. But the com­bin­a­tion of in­creased ex­ports and in­creased pro­duc­tion would hit Putin right in the wal­let.

For­mid­able forces at home op­pose more U.S. gas ex­ports, however. Some fear a short-term in­crease in do­mest­ic prices, and oth­ers worry about the in­crease in frack­ing that would come with the policy change. And the lat­ter group, es­pe­cially the en­vir­on­ment­al act­iv­ists already agit­at­ing against the pos­sible ap­prov­al of the Key­stone XL pipeline and deeply op­posed to any ex­pan­sion of oil-and-gas ex­plor­a­tion and drilling, are a ser­i­ous thorn in the pres­id­ent’s side.

With a new NBC News/Wall Street Journ­al poll show­ing a sharp de­crease in en­thu­si­asm among Demo­crats head­ing in­to the cru­cial midterm elec­tions, there is a price to be paid for a pres­id­en­tial move on this front.

Putin run­ning rampant, head­aches around the world, head­aches from al­lies, head­aches from his own base. All of these come with the ter­rit­ory for a second-term pres­id­ent. Obama and his sec­ret­ary of State, the for­mid­able John Kerry, may well nav­ig­ate through this. But first they will earn a many more gray hairs and en­dure many more sleep­less nights.

What We're Following See More »
SEVEN-POINT LEAD IN A FOUR-WAY
Quinnipiac Has Clinton Over 50%
2 hours ago
THE LATEST

Hillary Clinton leads Donald Trump 51%-41% in a new Quinnipiac poll released today. Her lead shrinks to seven points when the third-party candidates are included. In that scenario, she leads 45%-38%, with Gary Johnson pulling 10% and Jill Stein at 4%.

Source:
PROCEDURES NOT FOLLOWED
Trump Not on Ballot in Minnesota
3 hours ago
THE LATEST
MIGHT STILL ACCEPT FOREIGN AND CORPORATE MONEY
Chelsea to Stay on Board of Clinton Foundation
4 hours ago
THE LATEST

Is the Clinton family backtracking on some of its promises to insulate the White House from the Clinton Foundation? Opposition researchers will certainly try to portray it that way. A foundation spokesman said yesterday that Chelsea Clinton will stay on its board, and that the "foundation’s largest project, the Clinton Health Access Initiative, might continue to accept foreign government and corporate funding."

Source:
INTERCEPT IN MIDDLE EAST
Navy Calls Iranian Ships’ Actions Dangerous, Unprofessional
5 hours ago
THE LATEST

"Four Iranian ships made reckless maneuvers close to a U.S. warship this week, the Pentagon said Thursday, in an incident that officials said could have led to dangerous escalation." The four Iranian vessels engaged in a "high-speed intercept" of a U.S. destroyer in the Strait of Hormuz. A Navy spokesman said the Iranina actions "created a dangerous, harassing situation that could have led to further escalation including additional defensive measures" by the destroyer.

Source:
$300 SAVINGS CARD
Under Pressure, EpiPen Maker Drops Prices
5 hours ago
THE LATEST

Amid public outcry and the threat of investigation by the Senate Judiciary Committee, Mylan has agreed to effectively drop the price of EpiPens. "The company, which did not lower the drug's list price, said it would reduce the patient cost of EpiPen through the use of a savings card, which will cover up to $300 of EpiPen 2-Pak."

Source:
×