Preview

President Obama and Machiavelli

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1285 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
President Obama and Machiavelli
David E. Sanger, “In Step on ‘Light Footprint’”
The New York Times, January 9, 2013, A1

WASHINGTON — With the selection of a new national security team deeply suspicious of the wisdom of American military interventions around the world, President Obama appears to have ended, at least for the moment, many of the internal administration debates that played out in the Situation Room over the past four years.
He has sided, without quite saying so, with Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s view — argued, for the most part, in the confines of the White House — that caution, covert action and a modest American military footprint around the world fit the geopolitical moment. The question is whether that approach will fit the coming challenges of stopping Iran’s nuclear program and the potential collapse of Syria.
Gone for the second term are the powerful personalities, and more hawkish voices, that pressed Mr. Obama to pursue the surge in Afghanistan in 2009, a gamble championed by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Robert M. Gates, the former secretary of defense. Gone from the C.I.A. is the man who urged Mr. Obama to keep troops there longer, David H. Petraeus.
The new team will include two Vietnam veterans, Senator John Kerry and Chuck Hagel, who bear the scars of a war that ended when the president was a teenager, and a counterterrorism chief, John O. Brennan, who helped devise the “light footprint” strategy of limiting American interventions, whenever possible, to drones, cyberattacks and Special Operations forces. All are advocates of those low-cost, low-American-casualty tools, and all have sounded dismissive of attempts to send thousands of troops to rewire foreign nations as wasteful and ill-conceived.
Most important to Mr. Obama and his national security adviser, Tom Donilon, all three are likely to accommodate themselves, in ways their predecessors often did not, to a White House that has insisted on running national security policy from

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Richard Neustadt’s Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents discusses the powers of the president and the way in which these functions have changed in the most recent centuries. He first notes the importance of persuasion, which, when successful, creates more beneficial and lasting outcomes than if the leader had simply used his or her ability to give commands. Furthermore, the author goes on to state that national chief executive officers should be more “skeptical than trustful, more curious than committed.” () Likewise, he or she should be surrounded with a variety of opinions from trusted advisors in order to promote decisions that result in the best outcome for the most amount of people. Moving on, the writer speaks of the great shift…

    • 157 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    adding more knowledge and understanding of the changing situations. Without the education that Petraeus brought to the current conflict that we are in things could have gone a lot different because he had a higher understanding of counterinsurgency and was willing to spend the time to train and implement this understanding to others shows that he truly grasp the bigger pitcher. He is willing to change with the time and ever-changing theater. "he said in 2008 about the war in Iraq. "an Iraq that is at peace with itself, at peace with its neighbors, that has a government that is representative of and responsive to it citizens and is a contributing member of the global community could arguably be called victory"…

    • 327 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    C200 Exam

    • 1410 Words
    • 6 Pages

    1. In President Obama’s speech at West Point, he announced that 30,000 additional troops would be sent to Afghanistan. He made this decision because he said it was vital to the United States’ national interest. The vital national interest at risk in President Obama’s address is the security and safety of the American people as well as the “security of our allies and the common security of the world.” By involving the military and increasing the troop strength, President Obama can achieve the objectives of his strategy. His objectives are to keep the Taliban from becoming powerful, prevent them from government rule, improve Afghanistan security forces and government so they can manage their own country and prevent Al Qaeda from establishing refuge in other countries. If you follow the framework of several important U.S. documents, such as the National Defense Strategy (NDS) and Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) they will outline this same strategy. The National Defense Strategy states that it is the responsibility of the military to protect ourselves and our allies from attack. It states that the military should help protect and secure our vital interests abroad. U.S. security is linked with the security of the international community. The physical integrity of our country is protected by the military through multiple security controls. One of these security controls is through deployments of the armed forces. The Quadrennial Defense Review states the mission of the U.S. military is to protect the American people and advance our nation’s interests. The vital interests of the United States are intertwined with the integrity and resilience of allies abroad. Our vital interests are security, prosperity, broad respect for universal values and an international order that promotes cooperation among our allies. The President’s vision is to become more powerful domestically while bringing together all elements of national power. We need to help our neighbors…

    • 1410 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    Analyze these changes in the context of the international system level, state level, and individual level.…

    • 975 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Richard Neustadt

    • 605 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Neustadt acknowledges that the formal power of the US president is spelled out in the US Constitution but he argues that these formal powers do not adequately describe the real functional power of the president. For Neustadt the key to presidential power is the president’s ability to persuade other important actors to carry out what he wants done. Neustadt views the presidency as at the apex of a pyramid of governing power that provides the president with unique leverage and vantage points to bargain with and persuade others on implementing governing policy and direction. These other actors include cabinet officers and senior government bureaucrats, the congress, military leaders, leaders of state governments, party leaders, business leaders and even foreign leaders.…

    • 605 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Since the beginning, the relationship between the presidency and Congress has been a difficult one. The framers put into place a system of checks and balances to help make sure that there would always be such a struggle. The distinctive “tension between one branch writing laws and budgets and the other branch carrying out the laws and spending the money has been” (Professional Development) an essential characteristic of the American government. Although the Constitution gives Congress, the power to declare war and omit money for troops and weapons, presidents stay given a broad leeway to defend the nation and wage war. Presidents have stretched this power to move without congressional approval through military interventions.…

    • 856 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    my paper on Manuel Noriega and his connections with the CIA but the more I read…

    • 2434 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Defense Secretary Hagel discussed the U.S. military's ending a decade of conflict in Afghanistan and Iraq. (The WJLA.com Television (2014) website) Kaylan said the U.S. focused on politics and security and did not show how American values were better than what they had before (Kaylan, 2011).There is a natural cycle in the Army to start a conflict small, and then grow and after the conflict to go small again. After this war, the draw-down presented choices with conflict built into the process. While the United States is a low-context culture, the Army sub-culture is extremely high-context. Beebe discusses these…

    • 1012 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The war in Afghanistan started after the September 11th, 2001 attacks in the United States while President Bush was in office. President Obama was inaugurated as president on January 20th, 2009 and he picked up in the middle of a long war in Iraq and Afghanistan. After taking office, General Stanley McChrystal was selected to command NATO operations in Afghanistan. McChrystal submits a detailed report, to then Defense Secretary Robert Gates, calling for a surge of 30,000 – 40,000 troops in Afghanistan. The general’s assessment reflects the “Polis Model” in that he writes “success demands a comprehensive counterinsurgency (COIN) campaign” and further writes “failure to gain the initiative”, “risks an outcome where defeating the insurgency is no longer possible”. This assessment gives the portrayal that increasing the troop count in Afghanistan is the only feasible option and that any other method would result in failure. To make matters worse, McChrystal’s 66 page assessment…

    • 658 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Best Essays

    General Petraeus

    • 3944 Words
    • 16 Pages

    from the U. S. Military Academy at West Point in 1974 in the top percent of his class with a…

    • 3944 Words
    • 16 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Billie

    • 1955 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Dr Toby Dodge has identified several faulty assumptions that underpin military intervention, which explain why the US failed to bring order and development to Afghanistan and Iraq. One of these assumptions is that military force can achieve political ends, something which it did not do in Afghanistan. Henry A. Crumpton, a former CIA officer who was largely involved in ousting the Taliban, confessed that winning the war in Afghanistan required the US to “get in at a local level and respond to people’s needs so that enemy forces cannot come in and take advantage.” In ignoring this fundamental aspect of counterinsurgency, efforts succeeded only in keeping urgent problems at bay while hoping that the situation in Afghanistan would improve on its own. This brings us to a second faulty assumption underpinning military intervention: the overestimation of the stability, competence and popularity of the intervener’s local allies.…

    • 1955 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Ferguson paper

    • 368 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Since George H.W. Bush (41) took office in 1989, the United States has intervened in several high-risk situations such as the Gulf War, military deployment in Iraq, and the ongoing War in Afghanistan resulting in thousands of deaths of American soldiers. This is not okay because these soldiers are sons, daughters, brothers, and sisters, of fellow American citizens. Although the President can involve the United States’ military in any situation with the permission of Congress, he should not so if the opposition is a threat. The United States should not be the world’s policeman because foreign affairs require a substantial amount of resources that the U.S. should not let go; more so the United States should focus resources to being a global caregiver.…

    • 368 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Homeland Defense History

    • 938 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The national security counsel is made up of different secretaries, aides, and advisors. This is the main assembly in which the President uses information given to them on matters concerning foreign policy and homeland defense. The Secretary of State is the main diplomat in the assembly; their position is reliant on international affairs knowledge and diplomatic relations. This is an important position in today’s cabinets because of growing hardline relations between other hopeful superpowers. The Secretary of State and their diplomatic skills work closely with the Secretary of Defense and their skills of homeland defense. A cooperative relationship is key to success in foreign relations and homeland defense since these are the first advisory roles to the President in those regards. Another key member of the counsel is the National Security Advisor; this role has traditionally set the tone for NSC for the President. The position is regarded as having a special relationship with the President and comes with direct access. The NSC advisor is the Presidents senior aide and chairs meetings between the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State in the absence of the President. The role is a staff position and does not require congressional approval, the uniqueness of the role must be maintained and the position cannot overcloud the Secretaries.…

    • 938 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Aaron Harker

    • 338 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Modern presidents often conduct foreign affairs by executive agreement—agreements between heads of states—instead of the treaty process specified in the Constitution.…

    • 338 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The perception that a new president has chosen a strong team improves his chances for achieving his policy goals and managing the national agenda. If the president’s senior aides are judged by the media and key stakeholders to be knowledgeable…

    • 1018 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays