Attack on the office of President, Barack Obama promised to end the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, to restart the relationship of the United States with Russia and to restore the American middle class, But their obligations are not fulfilled, says the Expert on the economy of the US magazine The Nation.
instead of this, he writes, the White house found itself at war with an open end "with the" Islamic state ", began the cold war with Moscow and strained relations with China.
the reviews of the critics of Obama - an avid hawks and the neoconservatives, led the U.S. to war in Iraq, the American leader is too soft, the economist thinks. Declared Obama's strategic priorities, in their vision, had little in common with what they understand under the fundamental purpose of American foreign policy - the restoration of world leadership of the United States through the demonstration of power and determination. For example, such purposes could be the opposition to the Islamists in Iraq and Syria and the fight against Russia and China in Ukraine and East Asia respectively.
But in reality, writes specialist, foreign policy of the Obama administration, behind small exceptions, meet the views of the "party of war" and foreign aggressors. Its disastrous results as a result, even beyond the fact that Barack Obama himself, while still a candidate, ever imagined.
"The failure of the Obama foreign policy is not his care, or that in America it has lost power, and that he had adopted a lot of what was offered by his critics and interventionist, But was not able to protect key national desires of the country," he Wenninger.
Error of the White house, according to his vision, is that Washington has expanded (in terms of cases even dramatically) horizon foreign policy interests of the United States, and in the end, America was at the center of irrational wars and crises.
"It is reasonable to predict that North America could defend involvement in the Ukrainian crisis, don't be key members of the White house was so interested in the overthrow of Yanukovych's government and in particular does not support the Obama administration street illegal coup in Kiev ", - says the economist.
in one row with Ukraine and he puts the Libyan crisis. The disaster in Benghazi, the civil war between Islamist rebel groups and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction simply could not happen if Washington refrained from military intervention against Muammar Gaddafi.
review of Wenninger, damage American national interests should be assessed not only from the standpoint of the General instability caused by the policies of the White house, But also taking into account the negative effects in the long term. The entire range of accepted Washington solutions promises of American foreign policy " lost decades ".
"Imagine what nonsense were the actions of the U.S. In the past year. And at this same time, Washington was preparing NATO to deter the fact that there accept for the Russian aggression in Eastern Europe, Moscow has formed a new configuration of the Eurasian economy (in particular energy), strengthening ties with China, India, South Korea and Japan, " says the Expert on the economy of the United States.
Beijing also did not lose time, as long as the U.S. Department of defense "tinkered" with the Sunni extremists in the middle East, trying to subdue Iran and its Shia allies of American supremacy: China expanded the network of its influence economic initiatives, like the Asian infrastructure investment Bank and the economic zone of the silk road.