The Real Irony Of Obama’s Reset Button Goof
Earlier this month, in the spirit of Obama’s campaign pledge to undo the past 8 years of policy under the Bush administration, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton presented the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov with a fitting gift-wrapped button. The button said “Reset” in English and “Peregruzka” in Russian.
Much to the world’s amusement, “peregruzka” is not the Russian translation of reset but rather it means to overcharge or overload. The “goof” was headline news and everyone enjoyed a good laugh at the straightforward incongruity of the prop and its intention. However, the greater irony behind that prop is that it appears to be wholly appropriate. In what is now becoming increasingly apparent, Obama’s charge to reset foreign relations with its antagonistic neighbors has only heightened their disputes with and demands from the U.S.
Just a couple weeks ago Obama’s confidential letter to Russian President Medvedev suggesting that the U.S. might abandon a missile defense deployment in Poland and the Czech Republic if Moscow could help stop Iran’s nuclear weapon was rebuffed as “unproductive.” Even now Medvedev is counting on the U.S. to reset it’s missile defense plans in exchange for signing what will be a token nuclear arms control treaty that likely reduces U.S. nuclear development rather than any other nations. To further reset relations on it’s terms, Russia has openly engaged our friend in Venezuela who has agreed to allow full use of Venezuela’s air bases to Russia in order to meet their strategic aims. It may also be noted that in November 2008, Russia agreed to help Venezuela develop its own nuclear program casting doubt on its commitment to a nuclear arms control treaty.
But perhaps the most apparent illustration of Obama’s “reset” doctrine is a recent Nowruz video message to the leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran appealing for better relations between the two nations. Regardless of how one feels about the profuse praises of Iran’s culture and their contributions to the world or a need for greater dialog between the two nations, there is no denying a deeply troubling fact behind Obama’s message. By addressing his message to the Islamic leaders of Iran who are responsible for the past 30 years of strained relations cited, Obama not only reset support for, and possibly by, pro-democratic reformers within Iran but put the worst fundamental Islamic grievances on the bargaining table by accepting the authority of the theocrats.
In a stark change from the expected response by Pres. Ahmadinejad, Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei affirms the marked shift in policy with a quick, firm and very public backhanded slap.
“He (Obama) insulted the Islamic Republic of Iran from the first day. If you are right that change has come, where is that change? What is the sign of that change? Make it clear for us what has changed.”
As if rattling a sabre before the massive crowd chanting “death to America” in Mashlad, Iran’s chief mullah further incited the group by disparaging Obama’s call for change.
“If there is really any change, apart from a change in a small portion of your rhetoric, show it. Did you end your animosity against the Iranian nation? Did you release Iran’s frozen assets? Did you lift the sanctions against us? Did you give up slandering and broadcasting negative propaganda against our nation? Did you give up your unconditional support for the Zionist regime?“
Insisting should the U.S. show real change and meet these conditions, Khemenei assured that Iran would also change. How Iran would change wasn’t articulated.
Some might argue that Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and North Korea are merely testing the resolve of another new administration. Perhaps. Nevertheless, Obama’s open willingness to reset relations signifies that their sustained opposition has effectively forced the U.S. to cry “uncle.” Obama’s conciliatory overtures do nothing but embolden these nations to argue in the public theatre that their actions have always been a direct result of the U.S. government’s now failed policies. Obama’s reset button has truly given these nations the right to exploit relations.
For argument’s sake, let’s say the leaders of these nations entertain Obama’s gestures, can we really expected them to abandon the self-serving agenda that has maintained their power and brought the greatest super-power to the bargaining table? The answer is no. Only a fool abandons a winning strategy. These nations will continue on the path they have always pursued demanding greater and greater concessions from the U.S. that if met will only play into their favor. When a nation’s underlying objective is to see the U.S. fade from the political arena, what hope is there that a reset can really change anything?
Updated 3-25-2009: Hat tip to Gateway Pundit for posting the full transcript and video.
[...] high regard he’s paid to Iran, Strasbourg, Prague, and now Turkey make you wonder why he even wants to be an American especially [...]
[...] another example of the Obama administration pushing the reset button. SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: “Rahm Emanuel: Pushing the Reset Button on Israel Key to Iranian [...]