Outskirts Press, INC.

President Obama’s U.S. Foreign Policy Identically Mirrors United Nations Dogma

Today there exists a stark divergence between the competing geo-political philosophies of 1) the United States as the predominant player in world affairs and “an indispensable force for good” (i.e. American Exceptionalism) which President Barack Obama rejects, in favor of 2) Obama’s demonstrated preference for the United Nations Multinational (co-equal nations) world view of global governance (i.e. The Obama Doctrine of “Leading from Behind”). Specifically, as President, Barack Obama has conducted U.S. foreign policy by exclusively adopting the dictates and direction of the U.N. world view of Multinational global governance – however, to the detriment of optimally advancing and protecting the best National Security interests of the American People. Second, by shunning the decades-old dominance of the United States as the world’s leading nation in geo-political influence, President Obama’s actions have served to diminish (“taken down”) the stature of the future role of the United States in world affairs. Indeed, in promoting a diminished role for America in world affairs, Barack Obama is consciously serving the cause of, conversely, 1) raising the stature of the United Nations as the true heir to what the world body believes is its rightful and exclusive priority role in dominating global governance in the 21st Century while correspondingly, 2) raising the stature and influence of its next U.N. Secretary-General in particular. Third, in his conduct of U.S. foreign policy – mirroring the agenda of the U.N. Multinational model of global governance – Barack Obama has optimally laid the groundwork as a prelude to his desire to become the next U.N. Secretary-General after leaving the White House in 2017. However, President Obama cannot escape that, from the outset, he had a moral obligation to have disclosed to the American People 1) his intent to conduct U.S. foreign policy exclusively through the prism and dictates of U.N. dogma and 2) any ancillary ambition he may have to become the next U.N. Secretary-General – precisely because the voting electorate had the right to know.