Wilson Noah Mazile

PL SC 002: American Public Policy

The Obama administrations anti-realist foreign policy leads to

predictable results
By Washington Post Writer Jennifer Rubin on December 13, 2015
Jennifer Rubin writes a conservative opinioned article of President Barack Obamas
foreign policy focusing specifically on his handling of terrorist threats and foreign conflict over
the course of his 7 year presidency. Her article comes off as highly critical of the Obama
Administration and its handling of terrorism in the Middle East. As defined by many shocking
events since the start of the 21st century. Extremist terrorism has become the greatest problem
facing the United States of America and the world. The world is currently in an era of advanced
information & technology and mass media. It is seen today that small countries and large
terrorists group have the capability of delivering damaging destruction to the strongest of nations
like the United States. Terrorists find that the only solution to gaining the worlds attention to the
social, political, or religious woes of their country through catastrophic acts of terror. From the
attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, to the attacks of the U.S. embassy in Libya, and now to recent ISIS
attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, CA within the last month; these attacks are believed to be
sending an immediate message of change in foreign policy to the American government.
American foreign policy has produced two philosophical ideals of diplomacy in the last
century. There is one way of viewing diplomacy as an idealist, who believe that terrorism can
controlled by changing some foreign policy which heavily affect the existence of certain
countries and regions. The other way of viewing diplomacy as a realist who believes that acts of

terror are terrible forms of addressing any grievances. They also believe that they should not be
tolerated or negotiated for fear that a tactic of terror will only fuel the act of terrorist groups
becoming the norm for solving problems. Realists are all about defense and their national
interests. The major belief which realists hold is that terrorists cannot realize an agenda or make
justifications for their acts, which further demonizes these groups some who also deal with many
social and political problems. Currently, Syria is a prime example of this dilemma. Democrats
are seen as idealist and Republicans are seen as realists when it comes American foreign
policymaking.
Rubins article focuses on the realist philosophy and how Americas historic foreign
policy have always followed this realist principle in dealing with the problem of terrorism; until
the Obama Administration came and started changing the rhetoric. The article explains how the
Obama Administration has turned American policy into more of an idealist way of policymaking
and appeasing to the shocking terrorist acts that have taken place. Realists believe that the
idealists come off as weak and cowardice to acts of intimidation like terrorism. One of the
biggest criticisms of the Obama Administration has been their handling of the country foreign
policy. Rubin addresses their poor reaction to the Syrian Civil War and their apparent failed
nuclear weapon treaty with Iran. Rubin goes a far as to mock the administration for its epidemic
of delusion to what realists and Republicans are seeing as legitimate threats to the security of
America. America has always viewed its realist foreign policy as a pride of the countrys success
and it should not be forgotten that it was the foreign policy of President Woodrow Wilson who
coined the idealist philosophy with his Fourteen Points speech on rebuilding Europe after
World War I which should be mentioned that America won. It seems that the Obama
Administration has a different perspective for tackling foreign policy. Obama has addressed his

foreign tactics as being resilient and smart. It needs to be said that in 2008 Americans were
concerned with the war in Iraq. Then Presidential hopeful Obama assured Americans that his
foreign policy would not be rushed and reactive like the previous president who was had a realist
foreign policy agenda. Rubin and the conservative philosophy believe that this detrimental to the
country and future foreign relations.
The main point of the article is to the address the fact that Obama Administration has
frayed away from its once realist philosophy of foreign policy. America has been a realist nation
for some time. During the war of Iraq, the US made a lot of unilateral polices that were centered
on its own interests and principles. These are realist policies that America is used to seeing from
its Executive Branch. Rubin says perhaps it is time for some actual realism, a realist foreign
policy that understands our enemies do not share our aims and that the United States must act in
defense of its own interests, showing her call that the Obama Administration take more of a
realist approach to their foreign policy (1). CNN/ORC polls measuring the national mood today
show that the country are extremely concerned about terrorism and its potential overtake in
America. 60% of Americans say that are extremely concerned about Obamas handling of ISIS
(2). Many political writers and politicians like Jennifer Rubin believe that there is a lack of
aggression in the foreign policy of this administration. They fear that adversary nations and large
terrorists groups like ISIS will stop fearing America and take advantage of their lack of rhetoric.
Overall, it should be said that the Administration is not standstill in the issue. The administration
has been handling terrorism through airstrikes and diplomatic mobilization. They are just not
speaking the rhetoric of the realist or of previous presidents who used realist approaches in
foreign policy. It known that realists has their own flaws though they appear strong and
intimating towards other countries; can create its own problems that may invite more terrorism

than stop them from happening. This is not to say that idealism is better but diplomacy has many
facets for benefiting and hurting a country. Sometimes its just about the times and
circumstances that allow a country to control its approach to foreign conflict. Every US president
has to deal with unique kinds of threats and conflicts. That should not be a factor of whether they
are a strong or weak leader.
1. Rubin, J. The Obama administrations anti-realist foreign policy leads to predictable
results. Washington Post. Web. 13 Dec. 2015.
2. Collinson, S. Terror roils presidential politics, and a president. CNN.com. Web. 28.
Dec. 2015.