When The New York Times reports on President Obama’s foreign policy pronouncements, it treats rhetoric as reality.
A story in today’s paper, covering the administration’s “response” to North Korea’s missile test yesterday, gave the illusion of action in the face of international peril.
The Times reports that Obama called for new U.N. sanctions (which haven’t worked in the past). Our bold and decisive leader also “laid out a new approach to American nuclear disarmament policy — one intended to strengthen the United States and its allies in halting proliferation.”
Further down in the story, The Times explains that this “new approach” would consist of the United States reducing its stockpile of nuclear weapons and signing the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, strenuously resisted by Congress in the past.
In other words, if the United States voluntarily reduces its stockpile and limits its own weapons development, that will somehow convince our “reluctant allies” to begin enforcing sanctions against North Korea and Iran.
This The Times reported with a straight face.
But the reason the Europeans will have no part of trying to stop Kim Jong-il and Ahmadinejad is because they have the backbones of squid and will do literally anything to avoid a confrontation. Obama thinks cutting the legs out from under our own nuclear program will impress the Europeans with our sincerity and motivate them to action — a laughable premise that The Times finds entirely persuasive.
To show just how clueless this administration is, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates is poised to announce deep cuts in our missile defense program — which The Times will also report as another stroke of genius by our action-oriented president.
Hey, maybe if we scrap our entire nuclear arsenal that will really demonstrate our sincerity and convince the Europeans to take their heads out of the sand. Maybe not.
@nytimes.com
