The Foreign Policy of Barack Obama

by Joe DeRaymond

"The truth is that my foreign policy is actually a return to the traditional bipartisan realistic policy of George Bush's father, of John F. Kennedy, of, in some ways, Ronald Reagan, and it is George Bush that's been naive and it's people like John McCain and, unfortunately, some Democrats that have facilitated him acting in these naive ways that have caused us so much damage in our reputation around the world," he said.

"At a town hall event at a local high school gymnasium, Obama praised George H.W. Bush - father of the president - for the way he handled the Persian Gulf War: with a large coalition and carefully defined objectives." (Devlin Barrett, AP 03.28.2008)

I saw Barack give this message, watching a TV while lying back in an intensive care unit bed post-surgery. I needed to read the press reports of it, as above, to confirm to myself that it happened.

My understanding of the Gulf War of George H. W. Bush is as follows; first, that the State Department of George H. W. Bush told the government of Saddam Hussein, prior to the invasion, that the United States had no mutual security agreement with Kuwait, in a July 25, 1990 meeting with Saddam Hussein and his foreign minister Tariq Aziz, as capitulated by April Glaspie in this transcript from the meeting, "We have no opinion on your Arab-Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait. Secretary Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction, first given to Iraq in the 1960s, that the Kuwait issue is not associated with America."

On August 2, 1990, the armies of Saddam invaded Kuwait. In the next three months, the United States mobilized the United Nations Security Council to authorize the use of force to dispel the armies of Iraq from Kuwait. Although many nations urged a diplomatic initiative to resolve the dispute without war, Bush and Baker moved inexorably to war.

By the end of 1990, the United States mobilized over a half million troops to Saudi Arabia and southern Iraq. On January 17, 1991, an air attack was unleashed on Iraq. In the next 42 days, 110,000 bombing sorties were conducted using cruise missiles and bombs. 88,500 tons of bombs were dropped. Over 150,000 people were killed. The civilian infrastructure of Iraq, including water reservoirs, water filtration systems, telecommunications, and food supply was destroyed. On February 27, 1991, George Bush ended the hostilities, after the coalition forces had swept effortlessly through Kuwait and rapidly defeated the Iraqi Army. After encouraging a Shi’ite uprising against Saddam, George H. W. Bush allowed Saddam the air space to slaughter those who rose against his tyranny. 

A sanctions regime was imposed on Iraq, which limited the food, medicines and fuel available to the civilian population. The United Nations imposed sanctions were implemented through the remainder of the Bush administration and continued through the Clinton administration. They claimed the lives of over a half million Iraqi children, a fact that was acknowledged by Secretary of State Madeline Albright in a 1996 "60 Minutes" interview, when she said, "On balance, we think it’s worth it."  It was worth it to Saddam, who prospered in the corruption fostered by a sanctions program which allowed him to control the wealth and patronage of his office, as the people of Iraq starved.

While it was a quick war, it was very costly to the US service people who served. The introduction of depleted uranium and other toxins to the battlefield by the coalition forces caused 183, 629 disability claims from the 696,628 US service people who went to the theater of Desert Storm. By 2000, over 9000 of these vets had died. Depleted uranium continues to kill, as it remains toxic for 4.5 billion years. No troops were warned prior to their service in the field of the dangers that faced them in this new, toxic, battlefield.

I am not a Democrat, and do not wish to argue with Barack Obama about his analysis of this history. His understanding of this history is so stunted, and so crippled it is not possible to really fairly encounter – there is no argument. However, I can only wonder at the support he is receiving from people whom I know truly want a change.

OK, I can understand the need of people to grasp for hope in the midst of a political panorama in which the candidate for change of the Democrats hearkens to the years of such wartime success as has been outlined above, and then, deeper, to the glorious communication skills of a Reagan who united the country in a foreign policy typified by war crimes against Nicaragua, a holocaust in Guatemala, support for mass murder in El Salvador, and the arming of Saddam Hussein.

I encourage Democrats and Republicans to reclaim their parties, to demand policies of justice in both domestic and foreign policy from their candidates, and suggest that the best way to do this, now, is to turn to candidates of true change, such as Ralph Nader or Cynthia MacKinney. A vote for McCain, Clinton, or Obama, is a vote for a member of a club that will never represent democracy or justice in domestic or foreign policy.