THE SPINE DECEMBER 14, 2009
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
The president came out of Oslo a different man than when he went, and Simon Schama has traced the lineaments of the change in a column in today's Financial Times. It is a sharp break for the administration which had spent its first nine months telling the rotten world that it was good and somehow persuaded itself of the nobility of the lie.
One cannot overemphasize the drama of the change for which West Point was an ambiguous and ambivalent beginning.
The political street people in Norway immediately recognized the import of Obama's words. They protested with the usual surliness brought on by drink. But what I really wonder is whether those who engineered this unusual and unprecedented Nobel also felt betrayed.
After all, they had tried to lock the president into policies for which his enthusiasm has now obviously flagged.
Of course, the only substantial evidence we have of that--aside from his rhetoric--are his commitments in Afghanistan. What he and our military do in Pakistan is still to be seen.
But the relative toughness of the American commitment in Afghanistan can play itself out by the U.S. doing nothing about the Iranian bomb. And it's not only Israel that has interests in this matter. I would say that the Middle Eastern monarchs and autocrats have even more to worry about. After all, the Persian Gulf may finally overwhelm the Arabian Sea. India will not be made happy by another nuclear power to its west.
If, on the other hand, Obama has hewn out a new path of hardheaded skepticism towards the cartography of brutality in the world the Nobel, not really deserved but instrumental for the good, will become an icon of his presidency.
Michael Walzer, the modern philosopher of "just war" theory in our time, wrote about the speech in TNR three days ago. The president actually mentioned him at the ceremony.
And, if I am not mistaken, it was Samantha Power, frequent writer for TNR which published her Pulitzer Prize book, A Problem from Hell, who had very much to do with the content of the president's speech.
We are proud.
13 comments
"Obama has hued ..."?
- TARFON
December 14, 2009 at 5:01pm
TARFON "Hued" is the idiomatic past tense of the verb to "Huey Lewis" which means to rock out to the accolades of frat guys while still getting the respect of bikers. On this basis its use in the third last paragraph is either wrong or recondite. That said, I liked the post a lot and tend to agree with most, if not all, of its content.
- basman
December 14, 2009 at 5:55pm
I had the pleasure of hearing the phrase, ' pish-posh' today. Well put, I might add. Clever and sassy. Imagine the added joy with 'recondite and hued' bandied in an agreeable stew of search and discover. Yep. Marty tracks for the largest part.
- jacko
December 14, 2009 at 6:28pm
By the way Itz, I friggin love your definition of 'Hued'. I do believe Huey lifted a ' drinkin thinkin' line off of a tune that I pitched many years ago. " If This Is It' I do believe.
- jacko
December 14, 2009 at 6:45pm
I don't see what in Obama's Oslo speech represents any major shift in his philosophy. He has from the start taken the position that there is such a thing as "just war," and identified the Afghan war as such a war. The fact that a war is just or necessary does not dictate a particular means of fighting the war, i.e., does not dictate that there should be more soldiers or weapons deployed rather than less, or that its objective should be counterinsurgency rather than counterterrorism, etc. Indeed, a "just war' against terrorism could very well take the form of action in Pakistan rather than Afghanistan, if it were determined that that is the better way to fight Al Qaeda. Nor did Obama by any means repudiate engagement and diplomacy as a part of his foreign policy. And he continued to acknowledge America's "mistakes," including the use of torture and the establishment of the prison at Guantanamo. The idea that the Nobel Committee would feel betrayed by his speech strikes me as juvenile. Surely the Committee understands that there is such a thing as just war, and that sometimes war must be fought in order to achieve peace.
- dhurtado
December 14, 2009 at 6:58pm
The capital " Committee " might be an indication of where your sensibilities lie.
- jacko
December 14, 2009 at 7:16pm
"Nobel Committee" is its formal title, Jacko.
- dhurtado
December 14, 2009 at 8:29pm
jacko "The capital " Committee " might be an indication of where your sensibilities lie." "The Committee" reminds me of some self righteous Soviet group.
- jacksondyer
December 14, 2009 at 10:36pm
Jack, as opposed to my friend Jacko, I answered you--and fairly briefly too--on transcendence. Let's say I transcended my own prolixity.
- basman
December 14, 2009 at 11:37pm
dhurtado I can't do KSM right now: that ship has sailed for now with my will on it. Maybe on the return voyage, when the trial starts.
- basman
December 14, 2009 at 11:39pm
basman, thanks for the laugh in your first posting. I gotta give credit to Marty for one thing, he does bring in some fantastic writers and a great deal of diversity. He has reason to be proud.
- blackton
December 15, 2009 at 10:59am
Prolix is as prolix does. Itz... transcendental prolixity deserves some scrutiny. Would you be kind enough to toss me a breadcrumb or two that I might wander in that direction?
- jacko
December 15, 2009 at 12:05pm
jacko here it is: http://www.tnr.com/blog/alan-wolfe/further-thoughts-untenable-distinction#comments Chime in if you can get past all the --mine--verbiage. Blackton you are welccome.
- basman
December 15, 2009 at 2:45pm