President Obama in his annual speech at the United Nations over the last three years has offered three very different visions for his Middle East policy, each time completely revamping his priorities.
Earlier this week at the U.N., Obama appeared to have learned the hard way that his previous words and hopes for the region had little effect.
Just days after launching airstrikes with five Arab allies in Syria, Obama spent less time praising the power of international institutions like the United Nations, and more time arguing that they have lost their effectiveness and hailing American leadership in the world.
The United States has a long history of stepping up and addressing problems when no one else is willing to do so, he said, exhorting other countries to join us in taking on an array of world crises — the Islamic State, the Ebola outbreak and Russian aggression.
“After nearly six years as president, I believe that this [American] promise can help light the world,” he said.
He thanked the countries that already have joined the United States in taking the fight to the Islamic State and implored them to do more to fight extremism.
The United States, he said, is an heir “to a proud legacy of freedom, and we are prepared to do what is necessary to secure that legacy for generations to come. I ask that you join us in this common mission, for today’s children and tomorrow’s.”
His language was so bellicose when speaking of the Islamic extremists, at one point labeling them “a network of death”, that critics accused him of channeling former President George W. Bush.
Defending his boss, deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes Thursday said both Obama and Bush share a commitment “to go after terrorists” but this administration has used a different model.
“We’ve not used ground forces in this effort against [Islamic State], we’re using air power in support of partners on the ground,” he said.
“The president insofar as he was forceful yesterday it’s because he needed to make clear to the world that the ideology — the sectarianism has to be rejected just as we’re going to do whatever is necessary to deny terrorists a safe haven using our military,” he said.
In the past, Obama didn’t shy away from using harsh language to describe brutal leaders but his descriptions of terrorism and Islamic extremism have sharpened considerably in recent weeks as he started the bombing campaign against Islamic State and warned of their threat to the U.S. homeland.
The language against Assad was extremely critical over the last two years but also reflected his belief during that time that the situation in Syria wasn’t worth another U.S. military intervention in the Middle East.
In 2012, in the final stretch of his re-election and just two weeks after the Benghazi attacks, during his speech at the United Nations, Obama declared that the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad “must come to an end so that the suffering of the Syrian people can stop and a new dawn can begin.”
Describing Assad as a dictator “who massacres his people,” Obama said the U.S. and other world leaders “must remain engaged to assure that what began with citizens demanding their rights does not end in a cycle of sectarian violence.”
At the time, the president clearly wasn’t ready to back up his rhetoric with action. In the same speech he said the United States “cannot solve every problem in the world” and “will not seek to dictate the outcome of democratic transitions abroad.”
One year later, in 2013, his priorities in the region shifted again after criticism that he lacked a coherent Middle East policy.
After backing down from his redline threat to launch airstrikes against Assad, his United Nations address made clear that the U.S. saw the Iranian nuclear program as a much more immediate and serious threat to U.S. interests than the conflict in Syria.
He responded to the overtures of the newly elected leadership in Tehran by putting Secretary of State John Kerry in charge of negotiations to roll back some of the international sanctions against Iran in exchange for agreements to stop developing its nuclear weapon capabilities.
Turning to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Obama said also said he would make the peace process a priority again, and that the time was right for the international community to support the pursuit of peace.
“Real breakthroughs on these two issues — Iran’s nuclear program and Israeli-Palestinian peace — would have a profound and positive impact on the entire Middle East and North Africa,” Obama said.
Kerry is still pursuing a permanent nuclear deal with Iran but months ago gave up on making progress on his talks with Israel and Palestinian leaders despite dozens of trips to the region.
