The Obama Presidency Verges on Disaster

 Even if President Obama wins begrudging approval this week from either Congress or his lawyers for his desire to attack Syria, he risks a possible disastrous loss of influence at home and abroad for the balance of his second term.  In fact, that is already happening. While the President asserts the necessity to act if the international agreements against the use of poison gas have been violated by the Syrian government, the real reasons for his compulsions seem both political and emotional and are perhaps more transparent in the actions of his Secretary of State, John Kerry.  

  

Kerry’s passions this past summer run from the so-called peace talks he is conducting with Israeli and Palestinian leaders to his near fanatical call for an attack on Syria. Both are perfect examples of truth defined by righteous umbrage.  Kerry has proved willing to give away the store by suggesting that the problem of continued Israeli settlement expansion and the permanence of Israel’s already large settlements located inside the Palestinian territory be set aside so the basis of a peace agreement can be reached without such distractions.  Just this past weekend he turned to the European Union asking them to drop their restrictions banning financing and cooperating with institutions within the Israeli settlement areas in order “to demonstrate to the Israelis that taking the risk of moving toward peace is worthwhile.” [NY Times 9/9/13) 

Not only does this bizarre strategy speak volumes about the blind loyalty of the Secretary of State to Israel and its American lobby, AIPAC—it is also a window into a similar bondage of President Obama.  Even as the President seems compelled to an action that loses him the already thin respect of the Muslim/Arab world, confidence in him among Democrats appears to be seriously eroded.  This can mean doom for his domestic initiatives. Democrats, made politically vulnerable by Obama’s sudden weakness, can be expected to low ball their policy objectives.    

Equally important, this growing weakness threatens the ambitions of the liberal and progressive communities for a non-violent movement to transform banking, finance and corporate control of American democracy.   

This abrupt political climate change, if it occurs, does offer us an important teaching moment.  It’s an opportunity  to reflect about the compromises of the modern period that confuse moral principle with power;  a chance to ponder the declining role of the religious community as it often surrenders its prophetic truth-telling role for the comfort of good music and soft preaching; a chance to exegete “Holocaust Guilt,” when someone else’s self-interest defines our own civic disengagement.  On our way to a non-violent American spring we’ll treat these three issues in our next three issues of Public Liturgies—coming each remaining week in September.