Does the Pressure of Political Campaigning Justify Foolishly Timed Statements? — Like Hillary Clinton’s Suggestion that We Establish a Syrian “No Fly” Zone with the Russians already in the Air There

16 October 2015

Will former Secretary of State Clinton never stop tripping over her short-sightedness?

In addition to the tendency to provoke self-damaging political controversies — like her email escapade — former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton appears to exhibit a matching weakness with regard to crafting geopolitical strategy.

Consider her belated suggestion that we establish a “no fly” zone over northern Syria:

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton says she would push for a no-fly zone and safe regions in Syria to address the humanitarian crisis that has spilled out in the Middle East.

"I personally would be advocating now for a no-fly zone and humanitarian corridors to try to stop the carnage on the ground and from the air," Clinton said in an interview Thursday with WHDH-TV in Boston.

Russia launched its first airstrikes in Syria on Wednesday against what it said were Islamic State targets. But U.S. officials and Syrian opposition leaders have said the strikes hit areas not controlled by the Islamic State.

Clinton, following campaign events in the Boston area, said in a separate interview with WCVB-TV that the U.S. should look seriously at the no-fly zone and humanitarian corridors, "but at this point we have to put a lot of pressure on Russia."

Timing, Madame Secretary, is frequently important

The Syrian tragedy has been going on for more than four years. Not a peep out of Secretary Clinton about no-fly zones until after the Russian Federation had already put its planes into the air.

One has to assume that Secretary Clinton is now willing to tangle with the “Rooskies” over something that she was too disinterested in, or too hesitant to consider doing before. According to her implied thinking, America’s humanitarian interest in the region has only elevated itself to noticeability because the Russians are now actively flying around in support of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

To call Clinton’s strategy geopolitically foolish is being kind. If the United States has interests worth fighting for in Syria now, it certainly had them before the Russians intervened.

Indeed, some astute people think that the increasing possibility of a NATO-like no fly zone is what initially motivated the Russians to take to the air. The Russian Federation has far more substantial interests in Syria than we do. They were not, the hypothesis goes, willing to let the United States’ anticipated no-fly zone prevent them protecting what they consider to be their own turf of influence.

From a strategic perspective, as President Obama appears to be inclined to think — given his reluctance to inject the United States directly into Syria’s Civil War — President Putin may now be risking a draining no-win situation that the US was arguably wise enough to avoid.

Thus, with regard to Hillary Clinton’s no-fly proposal, preventing Putin from being sucked down the Syrian drain by changing the focus of his aggressiveness from Syrian rebels to American pilots makes little sense. We should not help our adversaries avoid international booby traps of their own making by diverting their enmity directly onto us and thereby aggravating their nationalism at our expense.

Of Clinton’s opportunistically discovered aggressiveness:

President Obama said Friday that Hillary Rodham Clinton’s call for a no-fly zone is Syria was a political move, although he stopped short of calling it a “half-baked” proposal.

“Hillary Clinton is not half-baked in terms of her approach to these problems,” Mr. Obama said in response to a reporter’s question. “But I also think that there’s a difference between running for president and being president.”

Why this matters — American politics could use a few grown-ups

Every time a prominent (and otherwise respect-worthy) politician takes an abysmally foolish position for domestic politics’ sake, American citizens are reinforced in their ignorance of history, culture and geopolitical common sense.

If a few influential political leaders began acting like Truth and Brains both mattered, the American electorate might actually have to mature out of its testosterone-filled, gray matter vacuity.

The moral? — There is a difference between political machinations and leading effectively

The short-sighted narcissism that got former Secretary of State Clinton into her admittedly over-hyped hot water about State Department emails has manifested again in her belated proposal to institute a no-fly zone over Syria.

Imposed now, the world’s two largest nuke arsenals would be directly odds. That would be a dangerous situation not in the interest of either one.

Secretary Clinton’s mind evidently worked too slowly to have grasped the no-fly opportunity during the four years that it actually existed. The fact that she suggests it only now, when it would cause the most mischief, rather than the least, should cause us apprehension regarding her strategic competence. Sun Tzu would boot her from Art of War School.

None of this is intended to indicate that Secretary Clinton’s anticipated Republican opponent, whoever he is, will not be even more clueless. Republicans have made an art of being all balls and no brain.

PeteFree.com

Does the Pressure of Political Campaigning Justify Foolishly Timed Statements? — Like Hillary Clinton’s Suggestion that We Establish a Syrian “No Fly” Zone with the Russians already in the Air There