Obama's Policies Bridged Bush and Trump

on
Two weeks ago, Awkward Mixture began an examination of the undesirable trends spanning Presidents George W. Bush, Barack H. Obama, and Donald J. Trump. Across a wide variety of areas, but particularly in foreign aspects, Obama either maintained or enhanced Bush's policies. His failure eased Trump's ability to escalate his worst impulses.

Last weeks article included the following issues in summary:

Bush prosecuted a spy under the Espionage Act. Obama prosecuted more people with the Espionage Act than all previous presidents combined. Trump has already locked away one whistle-blower, and consistently reviles them.

Bush began using drone strikes for the War on Terror. Obama increased them tenfold. Trump wants to use them more. Bush made a kill list, Obama assassinated Americans without trial, and so did Trump.

Bush, and many presidents before him, legitimized cruel and repressive regimes without seeking to change them. Obama aided Saudi Arabia's barbarity in Yemen, and legitimized El-Sisi of Egypt. Trump is fine when Saudi Arabia murders a US resident (married to an American citizen with children), is ok with their war of starvation in Yemen, and voiced congratulation for El-Sisi, among others.

Now for the next round of policies:

President Bush illegally, maliciously invaded Iraq and foolishly invaded (or foolishly misplanned) the invasion of Afghanistan. For these atrocities the citizens of the United States and the world should remember him as one of the most abysmal presidents in the history of the United States. Few have caused such suffering by their illegitimate actions. President Obama campaigned on ending the war in Iraq swiftly, and hopefully winning the war in Afghanistan before the end of his tenure. While he was able to withdraw all soldiers from Iraq by 2011, a significant number returned to assist Iraq in its fight against Isis. More significantly, the President, seeking to win the war in Afghanistan, surged the number of troops from roughly 25,000 (in 2009) to an incredible 100,000 by 2010. He announced a plan to remove all forces from Afghanistan by 2014, but left office with over 8,000 men and women in the country. In Iraq, Trump continued Obama's policies for fighting Isis, and the need for US troops may finally be ending. Trump wants to be paid in oil. On the other hand, plenty of people believe the war in Afghanistan is unwinnable. The United States is merely maintaining the status quo, protecting the system it devised when the war began. But Trump, like Obama, (both of whom didn't want to be involved, but felt they couldn't afford a loss) has implemented his own minor surge, from 8,000 to 14,000. Right now, there are as many troops in Afghanistan as in 2004, after the was was already two years old.

The oddest, most confusing choice of the Obama administration was to destabilize Libya. It was almost as if Obama wanted to demonstrate he could replicate Bush's failure. Though the goals of the military intervention were justifiable, the use of force was an issue. Particularly egregious was the disregard by the intervening powers (essentially NATO members), about the aftermath (considering the failures of the Bush administration in the aftermath of the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan). In 2011 the United States and Europe helped rebels win a civil war against the brutal dictator Muammar Gaddafi. But in 2014 the country fell into a new Civil War which continues to this day with no conclusion in sight. If regime change was justifiable, the Obama administration should have ensured a stable and just country, but it failed to do so.

One of the clearest actions the Obama administration could have taken to distance itself from the Bush administration (aside from not invading another country) would have been to prosecute the United States leaders who authorized torture. The Bush White House authorized the torture of numerous individuals, with practices such as waterboarding, stress positions, forced nudity, threats to self and family, sleep deprivation, solitary confinement, beatings, rectal feeding, and the use of phobias (Do it to Julia! Not me! Julia!). The Bush administration began using torture almost immediately after 9/11. Though the CIA had success with a regular, non-violent interrogation program, the message from the top was, use force. Instead of experienced interrogators, the CIA hired two novices, two inexperienced psychopaths to test out their cruel theories of spy-craft. When Bush considered rescinding the authorization of torture after the atrocity of Abu Gahraib was uncovered, Cheney convinced the President to continuing the policy. Cheney still believes the United States should use enhanced interrogation. Even though it is barbaric, inhumane, and useless. Obama promised to end torture, but only did so halfheartedly. Initially, no law was passed to close the loopholes which had allowed the Bush Administration to use torture. Obama banned it by executive order, which was useless, as any president could rescind the order quickly. In 2016 the executive order was finally transformed into law, but under Obama, the United States could still send prisoners overseas to be tortured by foreign governments (though there is no evidence the Obama administration did this). Most crucially, the President failed to prosecute United States officials who endorsed, ordered, or engaged in torture, proving to future malicious men and women that there is no punishment for atrocious conduct. His White House also blocked attempts by victims to sue in court. Trump has already said, “Torture works,” (the CIA admitted it doesn't) and “... Waterboarding is your minor form. Some people say it’s not actually torture.” He's asked his national security staff to review if torture is possible. He installed a torturer as he head of the CIA. And who can blame him after our last two presidents?

Inside Obama's own administration, one official went out of his way to protect the CIA's reputation after this self-inflicted catastrophe. In 2009 the Senate Intelligence Committee voted 14-1 to authorize an investigation into the CIA's actions during the Bush administration. It concluded in 2012, but before it could be condensed, redacted, and released, the CIA tried to intervene. The CIA secretly accessed Senate computers and tried to erase information, which is not surprising, considering they destroyed videotapes of their own interrogations (the United State's current CIA director Gina Haspel was instrumental in this action), for which no one was punished. When the CIA was caught, John Brennan refused to admit responsibility, or apologize. This issue occurred during Obama's tenure, and the President refused to fire him, in spite of his numerous lies to the American people.

The final issue today is nuclear weapons. Everyone knows President George W. Bush loved nuclear weapons, one might say he was paranoid about them. He illegally invade a country to deprive them of nuclear weapons they didn't have, but his record is ambiguous on their use by the United States. Bush advocated for bunker-busting nukes, and considered using them against Iraq. He encouraged research into the weapon, for possible use against Iran and North Korea. He also supported research into mini-nukes, small nuclear weapons to be deployed and used for serious, non-nuclear confrontations. Both of these ideas had supporters and detractors. Supporters believed these weapons would decrease the chance of nuclear war, because other nations would recognize that the United States would be willing to use small nuclear weapons with less provocation. Detractors claimed the willingness of the United States to use small nukes for lesser events than complete nuclear war, would more likely lead to escalation, World War III, and global annihilation. Bush also recklessly withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2001, because it prohibited research for anti-defense missiles (which don't work, even in 2017).

Thought Bush made these changes, supporters of a reduction in nuclear stockpiles can thank him. He reduced the total number of nuclear weapons owned by the United States by more than any other President except his father (including Obama), and reduced the percentage of nukes owned by the United States by half, more than any other President. The same can not be said for President Obama. Though Obama spoke early and often about about a world without a nuclear threat, pledging to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in a 2009 speech, he reduced the nuclear stockpile by less than any president. Instead, in 2016 as his second term neared its end, he announced a plan to modernize the nuclear arsenal of the United States. This plan is estimated to cost the USA $1 trillion over thirty years ($33.3 billion per year), create new nuclear weapons (including a nuclear cruise missile for use in non-nuclear war), and cause the United States to be in violation of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Obama cited the aging arsenal of the United States as the reason for this reinvigoration. But the United States still has approximately 6,800 nuclear warheads ready for use. Upon the face of the globe there exist roughly 1,000 cities with over 400,000 resident. The United States can afford to strike each of them with six nuclear warheads apiece. Even if the United States needs nuclear weapons, the immense excess it has is absurd and dangerous. The United States does not need the capacity to strike the major cities of every country with multiple nuclear weapons. Obama's only nuclear success was an agreement with Russia was New START, a continuation of a previous nuclear arms control treaty, bound to expired in 2012.

Of course, President Trump has made the situation worse. In 2016, he said that he was preparing for a nuclear arms race, even though anything more than the United States already has is absurd. He also voiced his opinion that the United States might withdraw its nuclear umbrella from South Korea and Japan, and that they should construct their own nuclear weapons, violating the Non-Proliferation agreement. In 2017, it was reported that he thought the United States should increase its arsenal tenfold, which elicited the famous, “moron” comment from then Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. And in 2018, President Trump embraced Bush and Obama's plans for low yield nuclear weapons to use in extreme, non-nuclear circumstances. He has also threatened to withdraw from the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces treaty which banned certain types of missiles, because Russia is in violation of the agreement.

In all these policies described above, President Obama failed to turn back President Bush's abysmal choices, sometimes even embracing them. His choices have enabled President Trump to continue the United States' destructive, inhumane, world threatening policies.

Next week, a final round of poor policies carried through by three Presidents, and the beginning of a reflection.

Recent:

Relevant:

Comments

Post a Comment