President Obama Reflects on America’s Inability to Influence the World

In a Friday press conference the president answers the question: “Has the United States of America lost its influence in the world? Have you, yours?”

National Journal
Brian Resnick
Aug. 1, 2014, 12:04 p.m.

Lately, the pres­id­ent has been strug­gling to turn his vis­ions for for­eign and do­mest­ic af­fairs in­to real­ity. Two sa­li­ent ex­amples: A U.S.-brokered cease-fire for the Ga­za con­flict fell through with­in hours (though for reas­ons bey­ond the con­trol of the U.S.), and it’s un­likely he’ll get any­where near the amount of money he’s asked Con­gress for to deal with the bor­der crisis.

Obama ad­dressed these short­com­ings in a press con­fer­ence Fri­day af­ter­noon. He was asked, “Has the United States of Amer­ica lost its in­flu­ence in the world? Have you, yours?”

Be­low is his re­sponse. It’s can­did, though hope­ful, and marked with a shade of resig­na­tion. (The later quotes were in re­sponse to a sep­ar­ate ques­tion, but con­tin­ued his thoughts on the mat­ter.) Em­phas­is is ours:

Look, this is a com­mon theme that folks bring up. Ap­par­ently, people have for­got­ten that Amer­ica, as the most power­ful coun­try on Earth, still does not con­trol everything around the world. And so our dip­lo­mat­ic ef­forts of­ten take time. They of­ten will see pro­gress and then a step back­wards. That’s been true in the Middle East. That’s been true in Europe. That’s been true in Asia. That’s the nature of world af­fairs. It’s not neat and it’s not smooth….

If you look at the 20th cen­tury and the early part of this cen­tury, there are a lot of con­flicts that Amer­ica doesn’t re­solve. That’s al­ways been true. That doesn’t mean we stop try­ing. And it’s not a meas­ure of Amer­ic­an in­flu­ence on any giv­en day or at any giv­en mo­ment that there are con­flicts around the world that are dif­fi­cult. Con­flict in North­ern Ire­land raged for a very, very long time un­til fi­nally something broke, where the party de­cided that it wasn’t worth killing each oth­er. The Palestini­an-Is­raeli con­flict has been go­ing on even longer than you’ve been re­port­ing.

You know, and I don’t think at any point was there a sug­ges­tion that Amer­ica didn’t have in­flu­ence, just be­cause we wer­en’t able to fi­nal­ize an Is­raeli-Palestini­an peace deal. You will re­call that the situ­ations like Kosovo and Bos­nia raged on for quite some time. And there was a lot more death and blood­shed than there has been so far in the Ukrain­i­an situ­ation be­fore it ul­ti­mately did get re­solved.

And so I re­cog­nize with so many dif­fer­ent is­sues pop­ping up around the world, some­times it may seem as if this is an ab­er­ra­tion or it’s un­usu­al. But the truth of the mat­ter is that there’s a big world out there, and that as in­dis­pens­able as we are to try to lead it, there’s still go­ing to be tra­gedies out there and there are go­ing to be con­flicts and our job is to just make sure that we con­tin­ue to pro­ject what’s right, what’s just….

I mean, the fact of the mat­ter is that in all these crises that have been men­tioned, there may be some tan­gen­tial risks to the United States. In some cases, as in Ir­aq and IS­IS, those are dangers that have to be ad­dressed right now. And we have to take them very ser­i­ously. But for the most part, these are not — you know, the rock­ets aren’t be­ing fired in­to the United States. The reas­on we are con­cerned is be­cause we re­cog­nize we got some spe­cial re­spons­ib­il­it­ies. We have to be — have some hu­mil­ity about what we can and can’t ac­com­plish. We have to re­cog­nize that our re­sources are fi­nite and we are com­ing out of a dec­ade of war. And, you know, our mil­it­ary has been stretched very hard. As has our budget. Nev­er­the­less, we try.

What We're Following See More »
ANOTHER MEETING WITH PRIEBUS
Trump to Meet with Ryan, Leadership Next Week
6 minutes ago
THE LATEST

A day after saying he could not yet support Donald Trump's presidential bid, House Speaker Paul Ryan has invited the billionaire to a meeting in Washington next week with House leadership. Ryan and Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus will also meet separately with Trump. 

Source:
‘EXACTING STANDARDS’
Obama on Trump: ‘This Is a Really Serious Job’
24 minutes ago
THE DETAILS

"President Obama used the White House podium on Friday to dismiss Donald Trump as an unserious candidate to succeed him, and said leading the country isn't a job that's suited to reality show antics." At a briefing with reporters, the president said, "I just want to emphasize the degree to which we are in serious times and this is a really serious job. This is not entertainment. This is not a reality show. This is a contest for the presidency of the United States. And what that means is that every candidate, every nominee needs to be subject to exacting standards and genuine scrutiny."

Source:
MORE EXECUTIVE ORDERS
Panama Papers Spur White House to Crack Down on Evasion
2 hours ago
THE DETAILS

In the The White House on Thursday night unveiled a series of executive actions to combat money laundering—"among the most comprehensive response yet to the Panama Papers revelations." The president's orders will tighten transparency rules, close loopholes that allow "foreigners to hide financial activity behind anonymous entities in the U.S., and demand stricter “customer due diligence” rules for banks.

Source:
THE QUESTION
Who’s #NeverTrump Courting as Possible Candidates
2 hours ago
THE ANSWER

The #NeverTrump movement is now mulling the idea of recruiting a candidate to run as an independent or under a third-party banner. But who might it be? The Hill offers a preliminary list.

  • Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE)
  • Mitt Romney
  • 2012 (and perhaps 2016) Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson
  • Former Marine Gen. John Kelly
  • Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI)
  • Former Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK)
  • South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley
  • Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)
Source:
362,000 JOBS ADDED
‘Mildly Disappointing’ Jobs Report
3 hours ago
THE DETAILS

The U.S. economy added 160,000 jobs in April, a "mildly disappointing" result relative to the 200,000 expected, according to the New York Times' Neil Irwin. On the plus side, hourly earnings were up 2.5% from a year ago. But on the other hand, "the labor force shrank by 362,000 people and the labor force participation rate fell by 0.2 percentage points."

Source:
×