Pentagon lawyers discover we don't have to defend our allies if threatened by Iran
There is no better metric to measure the health of American hegemony than whether trade ships enjoy unfettered access to sea lanes. Global maritime law is among the more settled concepts in international law, and its violation has universally understood consequences. American naval power guarantees the right of safe passage, and hostile powers know that they will encounter resistance if they used military force to prevent commercial ships from proceeding along their routes. At least, they knew that until Tuesday. Today, the world awakes to a new reality in which the United States has blinked.
If you're watching affairs from Moscow, or Beijing, or Tehran, or the capital of any other revisionist power, why wouldn't you believe that America's alliances are barely worth the paper on which they are written? Why wouldn't the Kremlin think it could test NATO's commitment to the defense of Eastern European states. Would London, Paris, Berlin, and Washington really risk war with a nuclear power over a sliver of territory in eastern Estonia?
It no longer seems like much of a risk to find out. Similarly, why would the People's Republic of China believe that a flotilla of "fisherman" colonialists who establish a base on the contested Senkaku Islands would be resisted with force? There is simply no evidence to suggest that would be the case. At least, not under this administration.
It's a more dangerous world today, and much of that is a result of Barack Obama's repeated displays of impotence and irresoluteness. Before this week, when it comes to America's obligations to its allies, Obama's "you're on your own" doctrine was only perceived. Today, it's precedent.Also read:
The Obama Regime Is Surrendering the Gulf to Iran
John Kerry to Iran, reportedly: Barack Obama is great and all, but he's no Ayatollah Khamenei
No comments:
Post a Comment