Home  ›  Make America Great Again Obama Plans

Make America Great Again Obama Plans

Written By Sunday, May 15, 2022 Add Comment Edit

Take hold of-all term used to draw one or several principles of the foreign policy of Barack Obama

The Obama Doctrine is a take hold of-all term often used to draw one or several principles of the strange policy of U.South. President Barack Obama. It is notwithstanding not agreed whether there was an actual Obama Doctrine. Nevertheless, in 2015, during an interview with The New York Times, Obama briefly commented about the doctrine saying: "You asked most an Obama doctrine, the doctrine is we will engage, but we preserve all our capabilities".[one]

Unlike precisely-defined policies such as the Monroe Doctrine, Truman Doctrine, Nixon Doctrine, Carter Doctrine, Reagan Doctrine or Bush Doctrine, the Obama Doctrine is not a specific foreign policy introduced past the executive. This has led journalists and political commentators to analyze what the exact tenets of an Obama Doctrine might look like. Generally speaking, it is widely accepted that a central part of such a doctrine would emphasize negotiation and collaboration rather than confrontation and unilateralism in international affairs.[2] [3] This policy has been praised by some equally a welcome change from the interventionist Bush Doctrine.[four] [5] Critics of Obama'due south unilateral policies (such as targeted killings of suspected enemies of the US) including quondam United States Ambassador to the United nations John Bolton, have described it every bit overly idealistic and naïve, promoting appeasement of adversaries.[half dozen] [vii] Others have fatigued attention to its radical divergence in tone from non only the policies of the Bush administration but many former presidents also.[vii] [8] Some trace the origin of Obama's doctrine to a speech communication he delivered at Westward Point in May 2014, where he asserted that the "United States volition employ war machine forcefulness, unilaterally if necessary, when our core interests demand it," but for indirect threats or humanitarian crises, "nosotros must mobilize partners to accept commonage action."[nine] This doctrine of "moral multilateralism," some debate, reflects Obama's interest in philosopher Reinhold Niebuhr, who supported an interventionist U.Due south. foreign policy merely warned confronting hubris and moral misjudgment.[10]

Pre-presidency [edit]

The term "Obama Doctrine" was used before the kickoff of Obama's presidency, while he was nevertheless merely a candidate in the Autonomous primaries. In an article in The Providence Journal from August 28, 2007, James Kirchick used the term in a derogatory sense, and argued that the Obama Doctrine could be summarised as: "The U.s.a. volition remain impassive in the face of genocide." This critique was based on an interview Obama had given to the Associated Press on July 21, where he said that "the United States cannot use its armed services to solve humanitarian issues" and that "preventing a potential genocide in Iraq isn't a good enough reason to go on U.Due south. forces there."[11] Hilary Bok, guest-blogging for Andrew Sullivan at The Atlantic's The Daily Dish, refuted Kirchick's representation of Obama'due south foreign policy views as a distortion. Bok pointed to Obama's use of anti-genocide activist Samantha Ability as a political adviser, and to several interviews the candidate had given expressing business organization for the state of affairs in Darfur and elsewhere.[12] Later, in a presidential debate with John McCain, Obama stated that the U.S. occasionally would have to "consider it as part of our interests" to conduct out humanitarian interventions.[xiii]

Later in the campaign, when asked the question about himself at one of the Democratic presidential debates in March, Obama answered that his doctrine was "not going to be equally doctrinaire as the Bush doctrine, because the world is complicated." He added that the Usa would have to "view our security in terms of a mutual security and a common prosperity with other peoples and other countries."[14] Later this doctrine was elaborated on every bit "a doctrine that first ends the politics of fear and so moves beyond a hollow, sloganeering 'republic promotion' calendar in favor of 'nobility promotion,'" that would target the conditions that promoted anti-Americanism and prevented democracy.[15] This policy was quickly criticized by Dean Barnett of The Weekly Standard every bit naïve. Barnett argued that information technology was not a "climate of fright" that lay behind Islamic extremism, but "something more than malicious".[xvi]

Then-President George Due west. Bush, in a May 2008 speech at the Knesset, likened directly negotiations with Iran, or terrorist groups such every bit Hamas and Hezbollah, to attempts at "appeasement" of Nazi Germany in the tardily 1930s. The comments were interpreted past some in the media, as well as by Obama himself, as a direct criticism of Obama.[17] Obama called the comments "a false political attack", and added that "George Bush knows that I take never supported engagement with terrorists," while Senator Joe Biden, Obama's running mate, said that Bush-league'southward comments were "demeaning to the presidency of the Usa of America".[eighteen] Bush spokeswoman Dana Perino, pressed for a clarification, stated that Bush's comments were "non specifically pointed to one individual," and that "all of you who cover these issues ... have known that there are many who have suggested these types of negotiations".[19]

In 2008, the term "Obama Doctrine" was used by Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Lord's day-Times in a comment on a speech given by so-Senator Obama at the Woodrow Wilson Center on July fifteen. Here Obama listed the five pillars of his foreign policy, should he be elected:[20]

I will focus this strategy on v goals essential to making America safer: ending the war in Iraq responsibly; finishing the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban; securing all nuclear weapons and materials from terrorists and rogue states; achieving true energy security; and rebuilding our alliances to encounter the challenges of the 21st century,

Sweet pointed out that these ideas were a reiteration of the essay "Renewing American Leadership," that Obama had written for Foreign Affairs magazine in the summer of 2007.[21]

Equally president [edit]

Not long after Obama's inauguration on Jan 20, 2009, commentators began to speculate on the emergence of a distinct Obama Doctrine in action. A proposal to close the American detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, the rejection of the phrase "Global War on Terror", and the reconciliation with Russia through the abandonment of the anti-ballistic missile plan in Poland and the Czechia, were taken as clear signs of a reversal of the principles of the Bush administration.[22] Critics, such as Pat Buchanan, rapidly derided these policies and criticized them for weakening the Usa' foreign relations. In an op-ed, Buchanan argued that Obama was "ceding moral high footing to regimes and nations that do not deserve it."[23]

In early April 2009, American announcer Marc Ambinder predicted that the president with time would take to accept a more pragmatic stance on the legal status of detainees.[24] Meanwhile, professor of international politics Daniel Drezner suggested the Obama Doctrine was influenced past French philosopher Montesquieu, whose thinking in Drezner'southward words could exist crudely summarised "useless conflicts weaken necessary conflicts." The Obama Doctrine, in Drezner'southward estimation, was to abandon foreign policies that had proven fruitless and unpopular, in order to focus on more important and pressing issues.[25] On April 16, East.J. Dionne wrote a column for The Washington Post expressing a highly positive view of what he saw as the Obama Doctrine. The column came in the directly aftermath of the successful rescue of Captain Richard Phillips from Somali pirates. He defined the doctrine as "a form of realism unafraid to deploy American power just mindful that its utilise must be tempered past applied limits and a dose of self-awareness."[26] Dionne likewise pointed to the influence Reinhold Niebuhr has on Obama, and quoted Niebuhr's warning that some of "the greatest perils to republic arise from the fanaticism of moral idealists who are not conscious of the corruption of self-interest" and that a "nation with an inordinate degree of political ability is doubly tempted to exceed the bounds of historical possibilities."[26]

Subsequently that month, at the Summit of the Americas in Trinidad and Tobago, the President was over again asked the question he was asked during the entrada, of defining the Obama Doctrine. The President replied that "the United states remains the most powerful, wealthiest nation on World, but we're simply one nation, and that the bug that we confront, whether information technology'southward drug cartels, climate change, terrorism, you proper name it, can't be solved just by one country."[27] In addition, President Obama expressed a desire for the United States to seek friendship with all, harkening dorsum to Franklin Delano Roosevelt'due south "Good Neighbor Policy." "I pledge to you that nosotros seek an equal partnership. At that place is no senior partner and junior partner in our relations," he said. "There is simply date based on mutual respect and common interests and shared values."[28] Political policy analysts such as Ray Walser lamented this opinion, arguing that portraying America as "equal" amidst the nations of the world would reduce its global stature.[29]

Obama afterward elaborated on his strange policy views, particularly relating to Muslim countries, in a high-profile speech given at Cairo University in June, where he called for reform of undemocratic countries from within.[30] Obama's efforts to amend foreign relations received praise fifty-fifty from former Republican Senator Chuck Hagel. Meanwhile, foreign policy analyst Reginald Dale, believed the President's policy of reconciliation had weakened the country in relation to other countries, such equally Russian federation, China and Northward Korea.[31] The fifty-fifty-handed treatment of all countries was too critiqued past some conservative critics,[32] noting in particular that in calling for all nuclear weapons to be turned aside Obama had placed US and Israeli nuclear programs on the same moral level every bit Iran'southward alleged weapons plans.[33] In that location was besides concern that Obama did non specifically place terrorists as a common risk to the US and the Heart East.[32] Others criticized Obama for the lack of a well-defined doctrine. Charles Krauthammer said that "I would say his vision of the globe appears to me to be so naïve that I am not even sure he'southward able to develop a doctrine."[34] Anders Stephanson, professor of history at Columbia Academy, coming from a different perspective, argued that an overly pragmatic foreign policy and the absence of an overarching credo could facilitate the return of a simplified American exceptionalism policy at a after betoken.[35]

The question of the Obama Doctrine once more came to the fore in connection with his acceptance spoken communication at the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony in Oslo in December 2009. The awarding of the peace prize drew a mixture of praise and criticism from all sides of the political spectrum.[36] Obama took the opportunity of the speech to address some of this criticism, and argue for the occasional use of forcefulness in international relations. "To say that strength is sometimes necessary is non a call to pessimism -- it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of homo and the limits of reason," he said.[37] According to John Dickerson of Slate, the President silenced his bourgeois critics who have labelled him as weak, while maintaining an insistence on diplomatic engagement.[38] The speech was mostly well received, and was praised by conservative figures in American politics, including Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich and John Boehner.[39]

Following the Feb 2011 revolution in Egypt, Harvard professor Niall Ferguson argued that President Obama's strategic thinking failed to understand the events in the region, writing: "I tin can think of no more damning indictment of the administration's strategic thinking than this: it never once considered a scenario in which [Egyptian President] Mubarak faced a popular defection ... All the president and his NSC team seem to take washed is to draft touchy-feely speeches similar the i he delivered in Cairo early in his presidency."[40]

National Security Strategy [edit]

In May 2010, the Obama assistants issued a study outlining its National Security Strategy.[41] The certificate called for more global engagement and sought to counter fears that the US is at war with Islam. It dropped the Bush era controversy over language such as the phrase "global war on terror" and reference to "Islamic extremism," adding that "The United States is waging a global campaign confronting al-Qaeda and its terrorist affiliates. All the same this is not a global war against a tactic - terrorism, or a religion - Islam. Nosotros are at state of war with a specific network, al-Qaeda, and its terrorist affiliates." Information technology also called for appointment with "hostile nations," closer relations with China and India, and a focus on strengthening the United states of america economy.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called democracy and human rights cardinal to the strategy, calculation that "We cannot sustain this level of deficit financing and debt without losing our influence, without being constrained near the tough decisions we take to make."[42]

In President Obama'south 28 March 2011 voice communication on Libya justifying airstrikes confronting the Gaddafi regime, the President stated the United States can utilize military force "decisively, and unilaterally when necessary to defend our people, our homeland, our allies, and our core interests." He also stated that where U.S. interests are not directly threatened but its ideals and values are threatened, or when there is a regional security crisis, the United States is then willing to accept a leadership role in intervention providing that the burden is shared by an international coalition.[43]

Sanctions as office of the NSS [edit]

Economic and other sanctions were developed into a useful and focused tool over the second Obama assistants by the Treasury Department. They are the subject of a book by Juan Zarate, a former White House staffer. The aim is to close off the market access of enemy banks, companies and state bodies. The denial of access to bail markets can hurt the enemy.[44] This was developed in the early years of the 21st century by practice against Democratic people's republic of korea and afterwards Iran.[44] The relevant paragraph in the NSS reads every bit follows:

That is precisely the reason nosotros should strengthen enforcement of international law and our delivery to engage and modernize international institutions and frameworks. Those nations that decline to meet their responsibilities volition forsake the opportunities that come with international cooperation. Credible and constructive alternatives to military activity—from sanctions to isolation—must be potent enough to modify behavior, just every bit we must reinforce our alliances and our military capabilities. And if nations challenge or undermine an international social club that is based upon rights and responsibilities, they must find themselves isolated.

Washington began isolating Vladimir Putin'due south Russia, slowly shutting off market access for Russian banks, companies and state bodies with $714bn of dollar debt. French, German language and British banks, among others, may feel some pain because they are involved in the Russian economy.[44] Financial sanctions were the West's showtime response to Russia's annexation of Crimea and continued bellicosity toward the rest of Ukraine, A Treasury official bragged that Treasury is "at the center of our national security," but sanctions have their detractors, such equally Daniel Drezner.[45] "Xv years ago, the idea that the Treasury Department would be at the center of our national security would have been inconceivable," Assistant Secretary for the Treasury Department Daniel Glaser said in a 2022 interview. "But we accept adult a whole new fix of tools to put at the president'south disposal."[46] An in-depth Bloomberg study on Russian prospects and European tax-havens indicated that Putin associates might exist in financial difficulty;[47] however on 5 May 2014, the Russian taxpayer provided funds to start a domestic online card payment service. Previously Russians had relied on Visa and MasterCard services, but when these services were temporarily interrupted by US sanctions in March 2014, the Russians decided that they were unreliable and redundant.[ commendation needed ]

In the concluding calendar week of June 2014, a court fined BNP Paribas $9 billion because it had handled foreign substitution transactions with Sudan, Iran and Cuba from 2004 to 2012. The company will be temporarily barred from handling some U.S. dollar transactions. On 1 July, Russian President Vladimir Putin stated that the U.s.a. had attempted to blackmail French republic: in exchange for cancelling the Mistral-class amphibious attack ship contract with Russia, the US had offered to drop the fines on BNP.[48]

Criticism [edit]

The NSS document was viewed skeptically in the Muslim world. Islamic republic of pakistan's Dawn paper had an editorial saying that the document gives "room to express scepticism over the new doctrine because we still run into the US interim as the earth's policeman. Mr Obama's statement that 'the US must reserve the right to deed unilaterally if necessary to defend our nation and our interests' is a articulate indication that the United states of america has non abased its war doctrine as such. ... Human rights violations committed by the U.s.a. are countless."[49] An Al Jazeera English language blog mail said the document "highlights the accent and priorities of each president depending on his worldview and US domestic and international continuing," though it added that,[l]

A quick review of the National Security Strategy of his predecessors Clinton and Bush, for case, underlines the similarities in structuring and phrasing such documents. ... The bottom line for the US establishment over the last few decades has remained the same despite (or every bit a result of) major international transformations. In each and every NSS we are to conclude that isolationism is bad for security and protectionism is terrible for prosperity. Expect the US to get beyond its borders to dominate new frontiers - not just geographically, militarily or economically as a traditional empire, just also cyber, space and other technological frontiers.

Within the US, critics have further picked away at the administration'southward policies. James Carafano of The Heritage Foundation noted that Obama's opinion is marked by "an overwhelming want to substitute soft ability for difficult power" and that the president "has no strategy for when the other side chooses non to cooperate, as in the case of Iran."[51] A Washington Times editorial criticized the president's strategy, stating that information technology should not exist "some kind of outreach initiative, it is the framing document for America's global safety. The United States cannot effectively gainsay the root causes of Islamic extremism by ignoring them."[52] In October 2011, Frederick and Kimberly Kagan, writing in the Weekly Standard, referred to the Obama Doctrine as "American retreat".[53] This followed the removal of American war machine forces from Republic of iraq, and the administrations failure to reach goals stated in 2009 regarding the withdrawal of those forces.[53] This view is shared by American political science professor Fouad Ajami, who called the Obama "The herald of this American retreat."[54]

Deficit reduction plan and the "Defense Strategic Guidance" certificate [edit]

As office of his deficit reduction plan, Obama announced that the growth of security spending would exist reduced by four percent from previously planned increases, past holding the spending increases below the charge per unit of inflation.[55] [56] A great deal of this toll containment (in money and the loss of American servicemen) came from replacing massive country invasions with selective drone strikes or special operations missions that have resulted in the deaths of top terrorist leaders, including Osama bin Laden.[57] [58]

These limited resources will be focused and managed to "Ensure U.S. forces tin defeat more than one enemy at in one case",[59] while the previous Bush administration had only planned to "decisively" win in only one of two "near-simultaneous conflicts".[60]

In a rare advent at the Pentagon on 5 January 2012, Obama unveiled a far-reaching defence force review[61] under which thousands of troops are expected to be cut. The new strategy would finish "long-term nation-building with large military machine footprints", and would instead pursue a national security strategy based on "smaller conventional footing forces". Leon Panetta emphasised the military would retain its ability to confront more than one threat at a time, and would be more than flexible and adaptable than in the past. Obama had been closely involved with shaping the blueprint, and met with loftier-ranking defense force officials 6 times over a quarter. The strategy shifts the Pentagon away from its long-standing doctrine of being able to wage two wars simultaneously.[62] "Even when U.South. forces are committed to a large-scale operation in i region, they will exist capable of denying the objectives of –– or imposing unacceptable costs on –– an opportunistic aggressor in a second region. U.Due south. forces volition program to operate whenever possible with allied and coalition forces."[61]

Come across also [edit]

  • Strange policy of the Barack Obama assistants
  • Bush Doctrine
  • Yemen model
  • Clintonism
  • Trumpism

References [edit]

  1. ^ Thomas 50. Friedman (v April 2015). "Iran and the Obama Doctrine". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 1 March 2017. Retrieved 26 November 2016.
  2. ^ ""Barack Obama's Executive Unilateralism."". Archived from the original on 2013-01-18. Retrieved 2013-03-10 .
  3. ^ Kelley, Christopher S. (2012). "Rhetoric and Reality? Unilateralism and the Obama Administration". Social Science Quarterly. 93 (5): 1146–1160. doi:ten.1111/j.1540-6237.2012.00918.10.
  4. ^ ""Obama, an economical unilateralist."". Archived from the original on 2013-03-03. Retrieved 2013-03-10 . {{cite spider web}}: CS1 maint: unfit URL (link)
  5. ^ Chollet, Derek; James Goldgeier (thirteen July 2008). "Skilful Riddance to the Bush Doctrine". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on nine November 2012. Retrieved 11 December 2009.
  6. ^ ""John Bolton Praises Obama's Drone Plan As 'Sensible' And 'Consequent' Extension Of Bush-Era Policies."". Archived from the original on 2013-06-28. Retrieved 2013-03-11 .
  7. ^ a b "Onetime U.N. Ambassador John Bolton on Obama and the Politics of 'Appeasement'". Fox News. 20 May 2008. Archived from the original on Sep 2017. Retrieved xvi November 2019.
  8. ^ Holmes, Kim R. (x September 2010). "Defining the Glick Doctrine, Its Pitfalls, and How to Avert Them". The Heritage Foundation. Archived from the original on 3 September 2010. Retrieved ix February 2010.
  9. ^ Obama, Barack (May 28, 2014). "Remarks by the President at the United States Military University Commencement Anniversary". whitehouse.gov. Archived from the original on January 21, 2017. Retrieved July 29, 2016 – via National Athenaeum.
  10. ^ Gobush, Matt (July 25, 2016). "Moral Multilateralism: The Obama Doctrine'due south Christian Realism". Providence: A Periodical of Christianity & American Foreign Policy. Archived from the original on Baronial 17, 2016. Retrieved July 29, 2016.
  11. ^ Kirchick, James (28 August 2007). "James Kirchick: The Obama Doctrine". The Providence Periodical. Archived from the original on 6 Dec 2010. Retrieved eleven Dec 2009.
  12. ^ Bok, Hilary (26 August 2007). "The Obama Doctrine, Take 2 [hilzoy]". The Atlantic. Archived from the original on 30 August 2007. Retrieved 11 Dec 2009.
  13. ^ "Presidential debate transcript, October 7, 2008". NBC News. seven Oct 2008. Retrieved xi December 2009.
  14. ^ "Democratic Presidential Fence on NPR". The New York Times. 4 December 2007. p. seven. Archived from the original on five June 2015. Retrieved 11 December 2009.
  15. ^ Ackerman, Spencer (24 March 2008). "The Obama Doctrine". The American Prospect. Archived from the original on 6 February 2010. Retrieved 11 December 2009.
  16. ^ Barnett, Dean (27 March 2008). "Meet the Obama Doctrine". The Weekly Standard. Archived from the original on 9 March 2009. Retrieved 11 December 2009.
  17. ^ Spetalnick, Matt (15 May 2008). "Bush sees calls for Iran talks equally "appeasement"". Reuters. Archived from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved eleven December 2009.
  18. ^ Bruce, Mary (eighteen May 2008). "Biden: Bush-league 'Appeasement' Quip Is 'Raw Politics'". ABC News. Archived from the original on 5 February 2009. Retrieved 11 Dec 2009.
  19. ^ Bush'southward Hitler remarks single-out no 'one' Archived 2012-03-22 at the Wayback Machine, Marker Silva, Chicago Tribune "The Swamp" blog, May 15, 2008
  20. ^ Sugariness, Lynn (xvi July 2008). "The war over the state of war". Chicago Sun-Times . Retrieved eleven December 2009. [ permanent dead link ]
  21. ^ Obama, Barack (July–August 2007). "Renewing American Leadership" (PDF). Foreign Affairs. 96 (four). Retrieved 11 December 2009. [ permanent dead link ]
  22. ^ Bondi, Matt (19 March 2009). "The Obama Doctrine starting to take shape". Guelph Mercury . Retrieved 11 December 2009. [ permanent dead link ]
  23. ^ Buchanan, Pat. "The Anti-Reagan". Town Hall. Archived from the original on xvi June 2009. Retrieved 9 February 2010.
  24. ^ Ambinder, Marc (three April 2009). "Decoding The Obama Doctrine". CBS News. Archived from the original on 6 April 2009. Retrieved 12 December 2009.
  25. ^ Drezner, Daniel (20 March 2009). "Explaining the Obama doctrine". Foreign Policy. Archived from the original on 2 December 2009. Retrieved 12 December 2009.
  26. ^ a b Dionne, E. J. (16 April 2009). "The Obama Doctrine". The Washington Mail service. Archived from the original on vii Nov 2012. Retrieved 12 December 2009.
  27. ^ Hayes, Stephen F. (10 December 2009). "Thoughts on an "Obama Doctrine"". The Weekly Standard. Archived from the original on sixteen Dec 2009. Retrieved sixteen December 2009.
  28. ^ Obama, Barack. "Official Remarks of United States President Barack Obama at the Opening Ceremony of the Americas" (PDF). Summit of the Americas. Archived (PDF) from the original on 22 July 2011. Retrieved nine February 2010.
  29. ^ Walser, Ray (21 Apr 2009). "The Fifth Height of the Americas: Render of the Proficient Neighbor Policy?". The Heritage Foundation. Archived from the original on 27 April 2010. Retrieved 9 Feb 2010.
  30. ^ Corbin, Cristina (4 June 2009). "Cairo Speech May Signal New 'Obama Doctrine' in Foreign Policy". Fox News. Archived from the original on 27 October 2010. Retrieved 12 December 2009.
  31. ^ Syed, Wajid Ali (30 April 2009). "The Obama 100 solar day anniversary: Strange Policy". Asian Tribune. Archived from the original on 1 May 2009. Retrieved 12 December 2009.
  32. ^ a b Limbaugh, David (9 June 2009). "Tickling the World'southward Itching Ears". TownHall.com. Archived from the original on 8 May 2012. Retrieved ix February 2011.
  33. ^ Lowry, Rich (5 June 2009). "In Cairo, A Qualified Success". National Review Online. Archived from the original on 20 October 2012. Retrieved nine February 2011.
  34. ^ Brinkbäumer, Klaus; Gregor-Peter Schmitz (26 October 2009). "Obama Is Average". Der Spiegel. Archived from the original on 28 Nov 2009. Retrieved 12 December 2009.
  35. ^ Stephanson, Anders. "The American exception". The National. Archived from the original on 1 April 2015. Retrieved 12 December 2009.
  36. ^ "Obama'due south Nobel win draws mixed reaction". CBC News. 9 October 2009. Archived from the original on 24 June 2018. Retrieved 12 December 2009.
  37. ^ Deshayes, Pierre-Henry (11 December 2009). "Obama's 'war and peace' speech silences criticism". Agence French republic-Presse. Archived from the original on 15 December 2009. Retrieved 12 Dec 2009.
  38. ^ Dickerson, John (10 December 2009). "The Nobel War Prize". Slate. Archived from the original on 21 February 2021. Retrieved 12 December 2009.
  39. ^ Weiner, Rachel (11 December 2009). "'Obama Doctrine' Praised By Conservatives After Nobel Oral communication". The Huffington Post . Retrieved 12 Dec 2009.
  40. ^ Niall Ferguson (14 February 2011). "Wanted: A G Strategy for America". niallferguson.com. Archived from the original on 14 July 2011. Retrieved 13 February 2011.
  41. ^ "National Security Strategy" (PDF). whitehouse.gov. Washington, DC. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2017-01-20 – via National Athenaeum.
  42. ^ "The states unveils new security strategy". Al-Jazeera. Doha. May 28, 2010. Archived from the original on May 30, 2010. Retrieved May 30, 2010.
  43. ^ "Obama's Libya spoken language: Total text as delivered - Political leader Staff". Politician.Com. 2011-03-28. Archived from the original on 2012-07-22. Retrieved 2012-08-25 .
  44. ^ a b c Evans-Pritchard, Ambrose (April 16, 2014). "United states fiscal showdown with Russian federation is more dangerous than information technology looks, for both sides". The Telegraph. Archived from the original on September 17, 2016. Retrieved July 29, 2016.
  45. ^ Drezner, Daniel (May 2, 2014). "Five myths well-nigh sanctions". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on August eight, 2016. Retrieved July 29, 2016. So are sanctions an outdated strange policy instrument, a safety option between diplomatic demarches and armed forces activity, or a new promise for American global leadership? The answer, of course, is none of the above.
  46. ^ Goodman, Leah McGrath; Browning, Lynnley (April 24, 2014). "The Art of Financial Warfare: How the Due west is Pushing Putin's Buttons". Newsweek. Archived from the original on August 9, 2016. Retrieved July 29, 2016.
  47. ^ Drucker, Jesse; Katz, Alan; Hoffman, Andy (May 5, 2014). "Russian federation Knows Europe Sanctions Ineffective With Tax Havens". Bloomberg. Archived from the original on October 3, 2016. Retrieved July 29, 2016.
  48. ^ "businessweek.com: "Putin Says U.S Blackmailed France Over Warship With BNP Fine" 1 Jul 2014". Archived from the original on 2014-07-02. Retrieved 2014-07-01 .
  49. ^ "Editorial:The Obama doctrine". Daily Times. 2010-05-29. Archived from the original on 2012-10-20. Retrieved 2012-08-25 .
  50. ^ "Obama doctrine rehabilitates empire - Al Jazeera Blogs". Blogs.aljazeera.internet. 2010-05-thirty. Archived from the original on 2012-03-01. Retrieved 2012-08-25 .
  51. ^ Carafano, James (28 May 2010). "Explaining the Obama National Security Strategy". The Foundry. Archived from the original on 18 Baronial 2011. Retrieved 9 February 2010.
  52. ^ "Obama'due south Jihad on 'Jihad'". The Washington Times. 8 April 2010. Archived from the original on eleven April 2010. Retrieved 9 February 2010.
  53. ^ a b Frederick Kagan; Kimberley Kagan (21 October 2011). "Retreating With Our Heads Held Loftier". Weekly Standard. Archived from the original on 2 Baronial 2012. Retrieved half-dozen August 2012.
  54. ^ Hill, Charles; Ajami, Fouad (31 July 2012). "Uncommon Knowledge with Charles Hill and Fouad Ajami". Uncommon Knowledge (Interview). Interviewed by Peter Robinson. Stanford, California. Archived from the original on xvi June 2016. Retrieved 6 August 2012.
  55. ^ Thompson, Loren. "Obama'south "Deep" Defense Cuts Won't Amount To Much." Archived 2011-05-13 at the Wayback Machine Forbes, 19 April 2011.
  56. ^ Capaccio, Tony. "Pentagon 'Undoubtedly' to Shutter More Programs, Principal Weapons Heir-apparent Says." Archived 2012-eleven-05 at the Wayback Machine Bloomberg News, twenty Apr 2011.
  57. ^ Turse, Nick. "The New Obama Doctrine." Archived 2018-11-06 at the Wayback Machine The Nation, June 18, 2012.
  58. ^ Tapper, Jake. "The Terrorist Notches on Obama's Belt." Archived 2020-04-xi at the Wayback Machine ABC News, September xxx, 2011.
  59. ^ Ashton, Adam. "Panetta hints at military budget cuts during Washington land visit." Archived 2014-05-02 at the Wayback Machine The Miami Herald, 23 August 2012.
  60. ^ Kaplan, Fred. "The Doctrine Gap." Slate, 6 July 2005.
  61. ^ a b ""Sustaining U.Due south. Global Leadership: Priorities for 21st Century Defence" 5 Jan 2012" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 17 August 2012. Retrieved ane May 2014.
  62. ^ ""Obama unveils new strategy for 'leaner' US military machine" 5 Jan 2012". Archived from the original on 4 Jan 2019. Retrieved 21 June 2018.

External links [edit]

  • A New Counter-Terrorism Doctrine for a New President past Prof. Ganor

U.S. Regular army Signal Corps OCS Association. The Obama Doctrine, a critical review of its impact on the U.South. Military's ability to back up the State Department's pivot strategy.

Obama, Barack H. (May 2006). National Security Strategy (PDF). whitehouse.gov. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2017-01-20 – via National Archives.

bestgunfoop.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama_Doctrine

0 Response to "Make America Great Again Obama Plans"

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel