My wife usually cuts my hair. When we got married fifteen years ago it was a budget necessity that she do so. Now, it's more habit than requirement. Last week I made an exception and visited a local barber, who I graduated with from high school. Not only was I long overdue for a hair cut, I also needed an update on local politics. With one stop and fifteen dollars my barber friend took care of both of these needs. As we discussed the county divide over building a second high school I just couldn't keep my mind from wandering to the weightier global issues that President Obama faces. He faces both domestic and foreign, economic and military concerns, all of which need deep Solomon-like wisdom. I am a regular reader of Strator Global Inteligence's commentary on world events and this is their take on the rising military crises President Obama faces:
Image Source by Scott Olson
Every president is tested in foreign policy, sometimes by design and sometimes by circumstance. Frequently, this happens at the beginning of his term as a result of some problem left by his predecessor, a strategy adopted in the campaign or a deliberate action by an antagonist. How this happens isn’t important. What is important is that Obama’s test is here. Obama at least publicly approached the presidency as if many of the problems the United States faced were due to misunderstandings about or the thoughtlessness of the United States. Whether this was correct is less important than that it left Obama appearing eager to accommodate his adversaries rather than confront them.
No one has a clear idea of Obama’s threshold for action. In Afghanistan, the Taliban takes the view that the British and Russians left, and that the Americans will leave, too. We strongly doubt that the force level proposed by McChrystal will be enough to change their minds. Moreover, U.S forces are limited, with many still engaged in Iraq. In any case, it isn’t clear what force level would suffice to force the Taliban to negotiate or capitulate — and we strongly doubt that there is a level practical to contemplate.
In Iran, Ahmadinejad clearly perceives that challenging Obama is low-risk and high reward. If he can finally demonstrate that the United States is unwilling to take military action regardless of provocations, his own domestic situation improves dramatically, his relationship with the Russians deepens, and most important, his regional influence — and menace — surges. If Obama accepts Iranian nukes without serious sanctions or military actions, the American position in the Islamic world will decline dramatically. The Arab states in the region rely on the United States to protect them from Iran, so U.S. acquiescence in the face of Iranian nuclear weapons would reshape U.S. relations in the region far more than a hundred Cairo speeches.
There are four permutations Obama might choose in response to the dual crisis. He could attack Iran and increase forces in Afghanistan, but he might well wind up stuck in a long-term war in Afghanistan. He could avoid that long-term war by withdrawing from Afghanistan and also ignore Iran’s program, but that would leave many regimes reliant on the United States for defense against Iran in the lurch. He could increase forces in Afghanistan and ignore Iran — probably yielding the worst of all possible outcomes, namely, a long-term Afghan war and an Iran with a nuclear program if not nuclear weapons.
On pure logic, history or politics aside, the best course is to strike Iran and withdraw from Afghanistan. That would demonstrate will in the face of a significant challenge while perhaps reshaping Iran and certainly avoiding a drawn-out war in Afghanistan. Of course, it is easy for those who lack power and responsibility — and the need to govern — to provide logical choices. But the forces closing in on Obama are substantial, and there are many competing considerations in play.
Presidents eventually arrive at the point where something must be done, and where doing nothing is very much doing something. At this point, decisions can no longer be postponed, and each choice involves significant risk. Obama has reached that point, and significantly, in his case, he faces a double choice. And any decision he makes will reverberate.
Where will he get the wisdom needed to make these decisions? Many of us look to friends and past experience for it, but in his case it likely it won't be sufficient to tackle what he faces. He must look beyond. He must look to the ultimate source of wisdom, God himself. James 1:2-8 (NIV) addresses both trials and the need for and source of wisdom:
2Consider it pure joy, my brothers, whenever you face trials of many kinds, 3because you know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance. 4Perseverance must finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything. 5If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him. 6But when he asks, he must believe and not doubt, because he who doubts is like a wave of the sea, blown and tossed by the wind. 7That man should not think he will receive anything from the Lord; 8he is a double-minded man, unstable in all he does.
So, let's pray for our president as he, on our behalf, faces these trials. Specifically, let's pray the following:
- These trials leads him to a true or deeper faith in the one true God, though his son Christ.
- That he would grow in perseverance and maturity in Christ.
- That he would regularly ask the Holy Spirit for wisdom on all matters.
- That he would select only advisors who exhibit true wisdom, and deselect those who don't
- That he would exhibit personal and political stability in a manner that glorifies God and his son Christ, and would execute accordingly and decisively.
