The PG has no real reason for its confidence in diplomat Obama

Written by Rosa Colucci on .

The Nov. 20 editorial "Diplomatic Dividend" argues that President Barack Obama's recent Asian trip will bear diplomatic fruit in the future in spite of reports he got nothing for his efforts. What diplomatic successes of the Obama administration support such an assumption?

Since the administration hit the reset button with Russia, the Russians have yet to cooperate on sanctions with Iran while they continue to maintain an armed presence in Georgia. Nuclear-capable North Korea drops missiles in the Pacific near our ally Japan with impunity. Despite Mr. Obama's unclenched fist and soothing rhetoric, Iran is beating and shooting its citizens in the street while it feigns cooperation on its uranium enrichment program, all the while continuing to press ahead with its own mission to get a nuclear weapon. Mr. Obama's enormous popularity in Europe has not translated into support for the "good war" in Afghanistan. So why does the PG remain so confident in Mr. Obama's Asian diplomatic efforts? Simple: He's not George W. Bush!

It's only fitting the PG would be supportive of Mr. Obama's efforts, given that he was the newspaper's endorsed candidate in 2008. However, continuing to bash a former president while ignoring inconvenient facts does not help Mr. Obama. It does, however, help define the word pathetic.




Join the conversation:

To report inappropriate comments, abuse and/or repeat offenders, please send an email to and include a link to the article and a copy of the comment. Your report will be reviewed in a timely manner. Thank you.