Brian Katulis posts at Democracy Arsenal, reflecting on President Obama's State of the Union speech:
.What we saw last night was the unveiling of the first 21st century foreign policy framework - one that no longer divides the world between good and evil, but instead recognizes that our fates at home are inextricably linked to what happens overseas, now more than ever and vice versa. Itâ??s a message Obama outlined in his speech to the United Nations last fall, and itâ??s one that will continue, even as our political debates shift even more inward this coming year.
And over at the New Atlanticist, Bernard Finel, commenting on Yemen:
In Yemen, our use of force now is creating the antecedent conditions that will later on justify more and deeper intervention, in part because by allying ourselves with the Saleh government we both make all of his enemies our enemies and we also because we are extending a tacit offer of protection because at some point, someone will argue, â??we have to back Saleh, otherwise other Muslim leaders wonâ??t be willing to side with us.â?
But if we step back and think about end states â?? i.e. begin a process of strategic assessment â?? isnâ??t it obvious that the goal for the United States ought to be disentangle itself from politics in a place like Yemen and seek to insulate ourselves from disorder that may arise there? There is no coherent U.S. interest in support of mediating the various internecine disputes on the Arabian peninsula, is there?
Finel chalks up this state of affairs to a lack of strategic thinking, but I believe it's quite the contrary. There is a strategic concept in action, and it's the one Katulis and the President have endorsed above: everyone, everywhere matters a great deal to the United States.
The real curiosity is why progressives are scratching their head over the Obama administration's refusal to cut the defense budget. With their vision of America's security interests, how could you?
(AP Photo)
