Comment: President Obama's Address to the UN General Assembly

President Obama before the UNGA (Source: Google Images)

Last week, President Obama addressed the UNGA. His speech's main message is that the US puts diplomacy in first place, however if it sees it fail America will not hesitate to resort to military force (under any shape or form). Furthermore, the POTUS sent some specific messages that I would like to comment upon: 

"Now, there must be a strong Security Council Resolution to verify that the Assad regime is keeping its commitments, and there must be consequences if they fail to do so. If we cannot agree even on this, then it will show that the U.N. is incapable of enforcing the most basic of international laws." 

Comment: President Obama practically questioned the relevance of the UN, in this day and age - why does it seem to slowly sway from its original goal? This statement is also a warning to Bashar al-Assad: if the UN doesn't act, the US will. 

"We are no longer in a Cold War. There’s no Great Game to be won, nor does America have any interest in Syria beyond the well-being of its people, the stability of its neighbors, the elimination of chemical weapons, and ensuring it does not become a safe-haven for terrorists."

Comment: a direct message to Russia: the US is not a direct threat to Russian interests in the country; however, it will not allow Syria to violate international law & agreements and gas its own people. If Russia doesn't care, the US does. The POTUS also reminds President Putin that if Syria becomes a safe haven for terrorists, Russia's national security will also be at risk. 

Regarding US policy towards the MENA:

A. "(..) military force, to secure these core interests in the region. (..) We will confront external aggression against our allies and partners, as we did in the Gulf War."

Comment: double message. 1- Syria and Lebanon (through Hezbollah) must not try to involve Israel in their internal problems. Doing so will prompt the US to support Israel (in unexpected ways). 2- Iran must not try to interfere with the free flow of energy in the Strait of Hormuz; it must not represent a direct threat to Israel (even if through proxies) and it must tread carefully when it comes to the Gulf Nations, in its Sunni Vs Shiite feud - otherwise, military force should be expected. 

B. "We will dismantle terrorist networks that threaten our people (..) work to address the root causes of terror. But when it's necessary to defend the United States against terrorist attacks, we will take direct action. (..) And finally, we will not tolerate the development or use of weapons of mass destruction (..) we reject the development of nuclear weapons that could trigger a nuclear arms race in the region, (..) After all, it is the Iranian government’s choices that have led to the comprehensive sanctions that are currently in place"

Comment: another message to Iran, despite the recent rapprochement. Iran should take this opportunity to re-evaluate its proclivity to sponsor terrorism, for all options remain on the table (mainly if Persia insists on pursuing nuclear weapons: overt or covertly). The sanctions imposed against Iran are a direct consequence of Iran's ambiguous behaviour. The ball is on their court: how will they decide to play...with or against us? 

"In the near term, America’s diplomatic efforts will focus on two particular issues: Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons, and the Arab-Israeli conflict. While these issues are not the cause of all the region’s problems"

"Arab states – and those who have supported the Palestinians – must recognize that stability will only be served through a two-state solution with a secure Israel. "

Comment: the use of the expression "Arab-Israeli" is of a huge importance because, for the first time, the POTUS has acknowledged before the whole world that the problem isn't quite a "Palestinian-Israeli conflict" but actually an Arab-Israeli issue. Arabs do not recognise Israel as a Jewish State (because they have been deceiving their people and re-writing history for decades now) and, on top of everything, sponsor multidimensional wars against Israel - hindering, thus, any progress towards peace. The POTUS also wanted to speak directly to the Arab League...and this blog is already digging for that unuttered message. 

"But the children of Israel have the right to live in a world where the nations assembled in this body fully recognize their country, and unequivocally reject those who fire rockets at their homes or incite others to hate them."

Comment: a historical statement. For the first time, the President of the United States addresses the bias, practised by the international community, against Israel. It must be said though that UN Ambassador, Samantha Power, had already accused the UN of "unacceptable bias and attacks against the state of Israel."; but for a president to do it, is actually remarkable. PA incites others to hate Jews: the president is aware of it. I hope the Jewish Right, and other conservative elements, are honest enough to admit this deed. 

"But sovereignty cannot be a shield for tyrants to commit wanton murder, or an excuse for the international community to turn a blind eye to slaughter." 

Comment: a direct message to Russia, China, Iran and all those who like to use the sovereignty and the "non-interference in internal affairs" cards to forge relationships with countries that commit atrocities against their citizens; and expect the rest of the world to just watch and shut it. 

"(...) leaving behind the old ideological battles of the past. That’s what’s happening in Asia and Africa; in Europe and the Americas. That’s the future that the people of the Middle East and North Africa deserve – one where they can focus on opportunity, instead of whether they’ll be killed or repressed because of who they are or what they believe."

Comment: in summa, the Middle East and North Africa are being left behind when it comes to human, societal and economic development - for all the reasons that are becoming too obvious to ignore (i.e. theocracy, political Islam and Global Jihad) 

Many will disagree, however this speech was one of the best UNGA speeches President Obama has thus far given: it was direct, strong and announced a new US stance before the world.