Teddy Roosevelt said that in foreign policy, America should speak softly and carry a big stick. Back then, Harvard graduates like Roosevelt had gravitas.
Our recent presidents, Donald Trump, Barack Obama, and George W. Bush, all earned one or more Ivy League degrees, but as William Deresiewicz argues in Excellent Sheep: The Miseducation of the American Elite, perhaps their education focused too much on networking into top jobs and too little on history, philosophy, and psychology.
None of these well-credentialed elites would have passed the undergraduate foreign policy classes I used to teach at a state university. In combination, those three smart presidents wrecked American credibility abroad by acting dumb.
Yale graduate and Harvard MBA Bush said he could see that former KGB Colonel Vladimir Putin had a "trustworthy" soul. Bush seemingly considers KGB officers outstanding people, regular Russian Rotarians.
Penn graduate Trump defended Putin's human rights record, saying: "You think our country's so innocent?" Trump expressed the sort of ignorance I expect from Marxist professors, not "Republican" presidents.
While a decent man in many respects, Columbia graduate and Harvard-trained lawyer Barack Obama acted dumbest of all. While running for re-election in 2012, a hot mic captured President Obama telling Dmitry Medvedev to convey to Vladimir Putin that Obama could accede to Russian demands, once re-election freed him from political accountability. Putin likely saw this as carte blanche to invade Ukraine and intervene in the 2016 U.S. presidential election: Putin did each, without Obama reacting in any serious way.
On Syria, Obama declared a "red line" keeping Russian client Bashar Assad from using chemical weapons against opponents. Assad soon crossed that line, murdering 1,400 civilians. Obama then ignored warlike allies like France (France?) which urged military strikes to uphold international laws against chemical weapons. Instead, Obama fired sharp rhetoric in Assad's direction, followed by Secretary of State John Kerry's feckless diplomacy justifying our nonexistent military response.
President Trump at least had the decency--and decency is not a word I usually pair with Trump--to launch minor cruise missile strikes when Assad gassed civilians on his watch.
On foreign policy generally and Syria particularly, both Trump and Obama ignore their own advice. In Dreams from my Father, Obama says to study others' history and motives. In Art of the Deal, the normally narcissistic Trump says you have to understand the other side in a negotiation.
Accordingly, we should ponder what Syrian dictator Bashar Assad wants. President Obama seemingly thought Assad sought approval from world opinion or the verdict of history, whatever those are. Only a Harvard man could believe such absurdities.
Chiefly, dictators like Assad, Putin, and the thugs in Iran care about two things: their own physical safety, and staying in power. The former depends on the latter because the dictator business is ruthless, even tougher than New York real estate or Illinois Senate races. From Anastasio Somoza to Moammar Gadhafi, deposed dictators have faced death from former subjects seeking vengeance. Dictators know that losing power means losing physical safety.
When dealing with an Assad or a Putin, appealing to their sense of shame is futile--they have no shame. Appealing to the verdict of history is silly--dictators live in the here and now.
Instead, dictators need reasons to change their behaviors. Unfortunately, we cannot influence Iranian behavior because President Obama's nuclear deal already gave away our monetary leverage, and contrary to President Trump's huffing and puffing, military strikes would likely fail. Regarding Russia, despite Donald Trump's man-crush on Vladimir Putin, the Trump administration and Congress have already limited American economic dealings with Putin's oligarchs, and sold arms to Ukrainians threatened by Russian aggression.
That leaves Syrian dictator Assad. Trump should stop tweet attacks--Assad doesn't care if Trump disses him. Trump should stop bombing Syrian soldiers, who are merely Assad's pawns. Instead, changing behavior requires a massive strike on Syrian military command and control--that is, on the likely physical location of Bashar Assad.
Even a miss would give Assad reasons to stop gassing civilians. Otherwise, from his point of view, why should Assad stop gassing civilians?
Why should any future dictator refrain from such ghastly behavior? Because their kid might not get into Harvard?
------------v------------
Robert Maranto (rmaranto@uark.edu) is the 21st Century Chair in Leadership in the Department of Education Reform at the University of Arkansas, and a longtime political scientist who works alongside three very wise Harvard graduates.
Editorial on 04/26/2018