Obama's irony, McCain's agony
updated 10:10 PM EDT, Wed September 4, 2013
Borger: Obama's irony, McCain's agony
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
- Gloria Borger: Decisions about military strikes are always agonizing and difficult
- She says the Syria decision features a president who famously opposed a war
- Also in spotlight is John McCain, who lost to Obama and disapproves of his foreign policy
- Borger: McCain may wind up backing Obama on Syria to avoid catastrophic defeat for U.S.
But as the Syria story
unfolds, there is an almost Shakespearean drama beneath the surface --
one of political careers made and broken, of past positions held and
almost abandoned. Not to mention the political enemies now finding
themselves -- awkwardly -- on the same side of history.
As the public debate plays out, the political past lingers, and haunts every moment.
Gloria Borger
First consider the irony
of Barack Obama himself. It's no surprise to anyone that this president
is a reluctant warrior. His rise to national prominence was based, in
part, on his antiwar sentiment on Iraq.
In the past, he's been a
forceful proponent of the need for congressional authorization for the
use of force. He tells the American people, at every opportunity, that
he is extracting us from two wars. That was at the top of his to-do
list, and he's doing it.
So now this, er, wrinkle
in which Obama becomes the conscientious aggressor. He is the president
who defends his National Security Agency surveillance strategy and his
frequent use of drones to an unhappy Democratic base. He drew the red
line on chemical weapons (which he now explains was also the world's red
line).
Obama: 'I didn't set a red line'
Sen. McCain's take on Syria hearing
He's certain we need to
hit Bashar al-Assad but seeks support from a Congress he generally
disdains. Like Lewis Carroll's Alice in "Through the Looking Glass,"
Obama could well be asking, "I know who I WAS when I got up this
morning, but I think I must have been changed several times since then."
Indeed.
As the president himself
pointed out Wednesday in Sweden, "had I been in the Senate, I would have
suggested Congress have the ability to weigh in." It was hardly lost on
him that it would seem, well, a tad hypocritical that someone who had
spoken repeatedly about a congressional buy-in on the use of force was
now willing to go it alone. So after the British said no, the president
looked homeward for a coalition of the willing.
And so, another irony:
The president's legacy now is in the hands of a notoriously paralyzed
and partisan Congress -- a Congress that hasn't exactly friended him.
And that brings us to
the agony part of this drama -- Sen. John McCain. Here's the man who
lost to Obama in 2008 and remains his foreign policy nemesis. McCain is
the GOP's major (and increasingly lonely) hawk-in-residence. He thinks
Obama made a huge mistake in not arming the Syrian rebels and charges
the president with dawdling for two years while this civil war
intensified. Oh, and by the way, he believes Obama's surgical strike is
too little, too late.
And yet, here he is, on
the verge of supporting Obama—and taking on the libertarians in his own
party. And not because he likes him, and not because he likes the
policy—but because he believes that a congressional no-vote could be
"catastrophic" for the nation. In the end, he may still balk because the
mission, as defined by Congress, is too narrow. But he clearly wants to
find a way to stand with the president.
"Alice in Wonderland"
would be right at home. "I can't go back to yesterday," she understood.
"Because I was a different person then."
end quote from:http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/04/opinion/borger-obama-mccain-syria/index.html
No comments:
Post a Comment