Ditherer in Chief?

As a strong Democrat and Obama supporter, it hurts me to write this post.  However, sometimes it’s better to hear the painful truth than pretend it’s not so.  Thomas Ricks’s recent post at Foreign Policy on Obama’s indecisiveness articulates a lot of how I feel about the president’s performance on a range of issues.

This is not a blog about US politics, so I tend to stay away from the subject.  However, since Obama’s indecisiveness directly affects US foreign policy on democracy and governance, I think it is a reasonable topic for the blog.  On foreign policy, the big dither is Afghanistan.  I have nothing to add to this debate, except that I agree with Rajiv Chandrasekaran’s observation that while “the middle ground is often safe political terrain, it can be the riskiest spot on the battlefield.” Some unsolicited advice: it’s time to be the Gambler (e.g., fold or go all in) not the Coward of the County (e.g., commission  another study).

Obligatory picture of Kenny Rogers

Afghanistan is not the only foreign policy dither. 10 months into the Obama Administration, the President still has not appointed an Administrator for the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).  While I have a lot of friends in the Obama Administration, I keep my relationships on a professional level and therefore do not pump them for insider gossip.  From what I do understand the problem is that some in the administration want USAID to be an independent agency, possibly with cabinet-level status, while others want to place USAID under the State Department.  Fights like this are commonplace in the Federal Government (or any bureaucracy for that matter) and it’s up to the president to make the final call.  The same debate existed when I was at the Treasury Department under President Clinton and USAID under President Bush.  You don’t need 10 months to make the choice.  Be the decider, not the ditherer.

Deciding is hard