National Security in The State of the Union
President Obama rightly pointed out the success we’ve seen in limiting al Qaeda’s ability to threaten America. It’s heartening to see him notice the incredible success of our armed forces, and to tie that to a limited engagement in Afghanistan and elsewhere.
However, the strategic uncertainty about what to do next is troubling.
America’s actions in Libya and Syria-where one dictator was deemed worth overthrowing, but another so far is not-point to a troubling ambiguity at the heart of American national security. If America does have “a huge stake in the outcome” of the Arab world’s struggle for freedom, then we should be taking steps to make sure that outcome secures our interests and values. Few argue with the idea of supporting freedom and democracy and standing against dictators, yet U.S. policy in the Arabian Peninsula, Central Asia, and South Asia, remain completely reliant on friendly dictatorships and other abusive regimes to secure our interests.
While we applaud a reaffirmation of American values and the primary place they should have in our role in the world, the reality of American foreign policy is, sadly, not in step with such aspirations. A values-based foreign policy would be an interesting goal to work toward, but it would require threatening too many of American interests, including the fight against al Qaeda, that such talk only serves to set up disappointment, rather than optimism.
