Obama's Foreign Policy: Iran Rising, U.S. Receding

President Obama’s major foreign policy initiatives–the “reset” with Russia, outreach to the Islamic world, and the end of combat operations in Iraq–have accomplished one undeniable achievement: they have brought Russia, Turkey, Iraq and Afghanistan closer to Iran.

And just this week we saw more evidence of the expansion of the orbit of Iranian influence at our expense.

First, the “bags of cash” report. Reuters:

On Monday, Afghan President Hamid Karzai said the country had received money from several “friendly countries” and specifically named the United States and Washington’s diplomatic adversary, Iran, describing the money as a “transparent” form of aid.

“Transparent,” by the way, means “nothing to hide.” Karzai is boasting of trading influence for Iranian money.

The other incident this week concerned Turkey’s very public reservations about a NATO missile shield. “Turkish concerns about the plan center on the way its NATO partners are explicitly describing the shield with Iran in mind,” reports EurasiaNet. The report then quotes Turkish Defense Minister Vecdi Gonul as saying that any such missile shield should be designed to defend against “the full range of ballistic missile threats.”

That was a telling choice of words. Here’s Dmitry Rogozin, the Russian envoy to NATO, using the same formulation when speaking about the proposed NATO missile shield in September:

To settle on guilty parties in this issue means to dodge a discussion of more serious issues. It is not only Iran that possesses missiles in Europe’s southern “underbelly,” but other countries as well, so if we are to start this analysis, we should analyze all those who possess this kind of technology.

In June, Turkey was the only NATO member to vote against increased U.N. sanctions on Iran. Turkey could provide an encore performance with regard to the missile shield; EurasiaNet notes that NATO decisions must come via unanimous votes and, therefore, “Even with no active role, Ankara could play the role of spoiler.”

Just last week, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki made a visit to Tehran to meet the mullahs and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. In March, it was announced that former Iraqi Interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi’s Iraqiya bloc won the most seats in the country’s recent parliamentary elections, narrowly edging out Maliki’s. The two could form a governing coalition together–as the U.S. would prefer–but Maliki’s trip to Tehran signaled that the Iraqi leader would like to see what pro-Iran Shiites in Iraq have to offer.

The U.K. Guardian reported as much following the meeting, asserting that the paper had been given details of a Maliki alliance with Moqtada al-Sadr, the Shiite leader who declared himself the head of a shadow government following the invasion of coalition forces in 2003, and directed terrorist attacks against coalition forces and their Iraqi allies.

The Guardian acknowledges the obvious, which is that such a deal would put the U.S. on the outside looking in after having only ended combat operations in Iraq this summer.

“The deal–which involved Syria, Lebanon’s Hezbollah and the highest authorities in Shia Islam–positions Maliki as a frontrunner to return as leader despite a seven-month stalemate between Iraq’s feuding political blocs,” the paper writes in what is a starkly chilling rundown of dealmakers.

Such a coalition would represent a remarkable failure of Obama’s diplomacy and foreign policy execution–as would a Turkish veto over NATO missile defense, Russian torpedoing of the same, and Afghan lawmakers and tribesmen showing up on the Iranian payroll.

What do all of these have in common? Iran is pulling the strings. After years of war, counterinsurgency, and infrastructure rebuilding in Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran is choosing who will lead Iraq and having Afghan governors fired for opposing them. Though Turkey has been an ally since the early days of the Cold War, the country is now vetoing anti-Iranian legislation at the U.N. and threatening to do the same for NATO missile defense. And we have squandered our negotiating leverage with Russia by allowing them to purge our allies in their near-abroad of our instruments of common defense.

No one expected Iran to have this much clout in the international sphere unless and until they acquired nuclear capability–that’s how abysmally counterproductive this administration’s conduct in foreign affairs has been. Conservatives have been derided by the left for their promotion of “peace through strength,” but Obama’s foreign policy has given us neither, putting both increasingly out of reach.