Newt Gingrich: Obama's Fantasy Foreign Policy is Dangerous

April 15, 2010 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (15)

By Peter Roff, Thomas Jefferson Street blog

In the heady, hopeful years following the end of “The Great War,” the leaders of the industrialized and democratic nations believed they could end war. Throughout the 1920s they produced a series of disarmament treaties, arms limitation treaties, even an agreement--the 1928 Kellogg-Briand Pact--to outlaw war as an instrument of state policy.

The responsible leaders of the time, still in shock over the carnage that the last European continental war had produced, pinned their hopes for the future on a fantasy transcribed onto paper.

It was a dangerous idea and, ultimately, a foolish one. Three years after the pact was signed the Japanese invaded Manchuria. In 1935 Mussolini’s Italy invaded Abyssinia. In 1936 Hitler ordered German troops into the Rhineland. In 1938 Austria was annexed and Czechoslovakia dismembered. The democratic powers, seeking to preserve the peace at all costs, responded impotently. By 1939, just a decade later, the world was again at war.

The world may again be headed down this path. Not toward war, but toward what former House Speaker Newt Gingrich calls “a fantasy foreign policy” that will leave democratic nations at the mercy of madmen.

Indeed the current threats, from terrorists, from North Korea, from Iran and elsewhere come largely from outside any of the global regimes set up to deal with critical nuclear issues, which Gingrich alluded to by pointing out the paradox of Obama’s having given a major speech on disarmament “while the North Koreans are proving on the same day--deliberately” that they had no interest in the new policy.

Gingrich also said the administration’s new global initiatives displayed a lack of seriousness. “When you can have a big, giant summit in Washington while the Iranians hold a press conference laughing about the concept of sanctions,” Gingrich said, “you cannot be serious.”

Comparing Obama’s view of the world to Ronald Reagan’s, Gingrich pointed out that “Reagan understood that when democracies lie to themselves dictators take advantage of them.” Obama, he said, leads an administration “that believes you can replace reality with words.”

Gingrich is not the only one to invoke the comparison, but some make it favorably. Democrats have been especially quick to point out that, like Reagan, Obama has signed a nuclear arms reduction treaty with the Russians.

It’s an interesting comparison but not a necessarily apt one. Reagan may have wanted to rid the world of nuclear weapons but he was committed to developing and deploying a system to defend against their use. He had no illusions about the nature of the threat that dictatorial regimes--including the Soviet Union--posed to the world’s democracies. There is no guarantee that the current president has the same understanding.

Tags:
nuclear weapons,
Iran,
North Korea,
foreign policy,
Newt Gingrich,
Barack Obama

Reader Comments Read all comments (15)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Let's face REALITY!

No one LIKES war. Ignoring that war is necessary or thrust upon Nations by Extremists without choosing IS "naive".

GWB did NOT come into office with an "Agenda" to start WAR! It was thrust upon him by the deliberate "naivete" of the Clinton Administration in declaring Osama (not Obama?) to be "not a threat to the US".

The dis-mantled CIA under Clinton was all we had left to "inform" GWB of the potential threat to the US from Iraq.

All the Democrats were all "on-board" to invade and remove Saddam...remember? HE was a BAD guy! Turned out to be be bad timing for US economically but HE is gone now.

IRAN is a direct and confirmable threat and what are we doing?

Telling them we won't do ANYTHING until they destroy one of our cities? GOOD PLAN MR JR SENATOR...SIR? IDIOT!

Why does the US feel it necessary to tell our enemies what WE will do? Best to leave them guessing I think.

Policy will change in 2012 anyway.

God willing.

Chris Petty of GA 6:59PM April 16, 2010

That's right Roff, pull out that trusty tool in your back pocket called 'fear'.

The same tool you used when Obama was running for president, the same used for the health care debate, the same used for increased diplomacy in the Middle East.. and now this?

You're embarrasing the true, couragous Americans out there.

How about some positive, fear-less opinions about our country once in awhile.

I'll leave you with this....if Obama's policies turn fruitful, you're certainly gonna go down in history as a whinning B%*#ch with no vision.

This stuff you post isn't erased, man. Is that how you wanna go out? A Pu$$y?

Brian of WA 4:20PM April 16, 2010

Remember Hippie Newt was part of Ron Paul's antiwar counter Republican convention in Minnpls in '08. That was before NeoCon Newt wants to nitpick Obama for being a strong leader dragging to the world to real non-proliferation and isolating fringe countries. Is that the same Newt who blasted Clinton for philandering while Newt was having an extra-marital affair, or is it the Christian Righty Newt who got all his divorces over with before he became a Catholic.

Newt will be your flavor of the month in his crazy attempt to sell his brand of hypocrisy. Just let him know which way the wind is blowing, and he'll be a flip floppin' to get your attention.

Suzy of LA 2:49PM April 16, 2010

Peter Roff

Peter Roff

Peter Roff is a contributing editor at U.S. News & World Report. Formerly a senior political writer for United Press International, he’s now affiliated with several public policy organizations including Let Freedom Ring, and Frontiers of Freedom. His writing has appeared in National Review, Fox News’ opinion section, The Daily Caller, Politico and elsewhere. Follow him on Twitter @PeterRoff.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

Political Enemies: Good vs. Perfect

In politics the perfect is often the enemy of the good.

Mary Kate Cary

Washington’s Toxic Stew

President Obama's burgeoning problems affect more than this week’s three scandals.

Latest Videos

advertisement