Obama and International Institutions: How's That Working Out?

Liberals love internaltional institutions

Democrats are very fond of international institutions and treaties – for only they can provide a check on the evilness of American power and domination:

“The president is deeply committed to using multilateral tools …,” said Brimmer, who was appointed by Obama. “It is the decision to take the issues back into the United Nations and other international organizations and to empower those multilateral institutions to fulfill their intended roles that makes real the president’s commitment.“

Fair enough.  I’m willing to support what works.  How is this belief working in the real world (a place Liberal ideas fall flat)?

China’s U.N. ambassador on Tuesday dashed Western hopes for a swift agreement on a fourth round of U.N. sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program, saying the issue requires more “time and patience.”

“This is not the right time or right moment for sanctions because the diplomatic efforts are still going on,” Chinese envoy Zhang Yesui told reporters.

Okay, China is allowed to disagree.  How about Russia?

Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin stood with his Chinese counterpart, announcing his opposition to a new round of sanctions against the Tehran government.

Wonder why Russia would be opposed to new sanctions?

Iran’s non-oil exports to Russia has increased more than five-fold over the period of March 1999 to March 2009, the director of the Trade Promotion Organization of Iran (TPOI) announced here on Monday.

Iranian-Russian trade turnover rose to $3.7 billion last year, according to Fars News Agency.

But what about China?  They must have reasons to oppose new sanctions:

Iran shipped more than 700,000 barrels of crude oil per day to China in May, an increase of 88 percent from the same period in 2008, the Iranian Petroenergy Information Network reports.

Clearly Russia and China have economic incentives to not impose new sanctions on Iran.  This is not to say that America does not trade with Iran, either [from a 2008 story]:

Top U.S. exports to Iran over Bush’s years in office include corn, $68 million; chemical wood pulp, soda or sulfate, $64 million; soybeans, $43 million; medical equipment, $27 million; vitamins, $18 million; bull semen, $12.6 million; and vegetable seeds, $12 million, according to the AP’s analysis of government trade data compiled by the World Institute for Strategic Economic Research in Holyoke, Mass. The value of cigarettes sold to Iran was more than twice that of the No. 2 category on the export list, vaccines, serums and blood products, $73 million.

Still, it is a drop in the bucket for America, which sends more than $1 trillion worth of goods overseas each year and nobody would think things like bras and bull semen are being used to build an atomic weapon.

Barack Obama’s (and his party’s) repeated assertions that “going it alone” are a bad idea means whatever threats they use against Iran will be ignored, such as this one:

President Barack Obama has offered Iran the possibility of deeper engagement with the United States if it cooperates on removing fears about its nuclear program and on other issues. This reversed the policy of Obama’s predecessor George W. Bush, who had advocated isolating and punishing Iran.

Obama had given Iran until the end of 2009 to respond to his overtures and to an offer from the six powers of economic and political incentives in exchange for a suspension of Iran’s nuclear enrichment program. Iran ignored the deadline.

Former President George W. Bush didn’t succeed in stopping Iran’s drive for nuclear power and it is my belief that the war in Iraq created a dangerous block towards any action against Iran… after all, American troops were tied up in the wrong country.  Of course, Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator and ideally taking out Iraq and Iran’s leadership would have been ideal, however that is too much for any one country to manage.

It’s tough to say if Bush would have done anything after Iran’s stolen presidential elections and brutal repression of Iran’s citizens in the protests that continue to this day, but it’s clear that Obama’s essentially ignoring of these events gave Iranian leadership the confidence they needed to continue the crackdown.

Working through organizations like the United Nations didn’t do anything to help the people of Rwanda, Darfur, Bosnia, or Kuwait when it was invaded by Iraq and it hasn’t done anything regarding North Korea, either.  Iran will be no different and Obama’s silly threats against Iranian political leaders and his absurd “reaching out” to hostile regimes means they’ve got the U.S. president figured out as a patsy, one to be played until they test their nuclear weapons.

I fear that Obama’s “reaching out” has already made him look like such a fool that we’ll need a new president, one with a more realistic view of the world, in order to do anything with Iran.  By the time Americans get the chance to elect someone new Iran will already have their nukes and it will be too late.