Jackson Diehl Meet Jon Kyl; Jon Kyl Meet Jackson Diehl
Posted by Michael Cohen
Jackson Diehl has a particularly strange op-ed in the Washington Post today that complains President Obama's foreign policy is stuck in the past because he currently seems focused on two issues that were fairly prominent in 1983 - the Middle East Peace Process and international arms control (namely the New START treaty).
Let's dispense with the obvious point - this is a silly argument. Did Jackson Diehl miss that whole war going on in Afghanistan or that President Obama just traveled to the NATO Summit in Lisbon to discuss said war? For Diehl to argue that the Arab Israeli conflict or arms control are front and center in Obama's foreign policy. Honestly what planet is Diehl living on?
But this isn't even the worst part of Diehl's argument. This is:
That doesn't mean the START treaty is worthless. The Senate ought to approve it if only to ensure the continued monitoring of Russian missiles. But does it merit dispatching the vice president and the secretaries of state and defense to Capitol Hill for a desperate (and uphill) lobbying offensive? It's hard to see why.
"It's hard to see why?" Really? It's hard for Jackson Diehl to understand why the Administration has had to expend serious political capital to pass the START treaty? How about the fact that a treaty, which is fairly uncontroversial, is being stridently opposed by the Republican Party? Has Diehl just missed the whole drama where Republicans, led by Jon Kyl, have threatened to weaken US national security by failing to pass an agreement that is essential to improving US-Russian relations and critical to the President's non-proliferation agenda. For example, Diehl could read in his own paper about just this obstructionism: here and here. Or he could read here about how our European Allies are increasingly concerned that failure to pass START will harm efforts to put pressure on Iran or negotiate deals with Russia to curb shorter range missiles.
You know, THAT might even make a good topic for an op-ed.
Honestly, it is so much to ask for the leading foreign policy columnist of the Washington Post to actually read his own paper?