Obama’s Presidency -- a Gift or a Trojan Horse for America?

At the president’s inauguration some members of the mainstream media fumbled to find words to capture the momentous occasion. Many compared the event to a coronation of royalty and went so far as to compare the inauguration to the Second Coming. Some commentators saw the new president as a divine gift sent to save America and the entire free world. That gift may turn out to be somewhat of a Trojan horse.

In his inaugural speech, the president extended himself to our enemies by saying "…that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist." His statement was conciliatory and firm and we all hoped it would begin a peaceful dialogue with those who would do us harm. Our president may truly believe that he can talk our enemies out of killing us, and I give him credit for trying. Unfortunately, to buy into the president’s approach we must believe that we can rationalize with terrorists who think little of killing themselves, let alone us. We must also believe that our enemies hate us because they hate Republicans, former President Bush and/or America’s attitude and behavior toward the rest of the world in recent years. However, terrorists have been trying to kill us long before anyone ever heard of George W. Bush. Remember the botched attempt to blow up New York’s World Trade Center in 1993, during the Clinton administration?

My real concern is not that President Obama seeks to talk to our enemies but that he seems to be signaling his intent to dismantle certain elements of the national security infrastructure that arguably kept us safe since 9/11. Thankfully, the president now seems to appreciate the actions of his predecessor concerning national security and is moving cautiously in implementing changes. However, proposing cuts in national defense spending and eliminating enhanced interrogation techniques make me wonder if the president is taking national security just a little less seriously than he should. The president seems preoccupied with securing the civil rights of terrorists when his objective should be to keep us safe. While those two objectives are not always mutually exclusive, they do compete and giving weight to the former is likely to hinder proper execution of the latter at times. We need to know that our interests will come first next time we’re attacked.

It is impossible to prove that the methods and tactics employed by the Bush administration kept us safe, but it is at least heartening to know that none of the more than 11,000 terrorist attacks (and more than 14,000 deaths) that took place worldwide since 9/11 occurred on American soil. It is equally impossible to claim that the absence of terrorist activity in the U.S. under this new administration thus far proves the success of the president’s approach. In fact, contrary to Joe Biden’s assertion during the presidential campaign, it is plausible that our enemies will choose not to test our new president’s mettle early in his administration. Why should they? If they believe the new administration will relax national security measures, even slightly, going forward, they would be wise to bide their time for a few years, and attack us later when we least expect it.