Former Democratic President Barack Obama built much of his political reputation on being one of the Democratic Party’s most polished communicators. That’s why his latest comments on Iran left me wondering why he was borrowing a page from Kamala Harris’ famous word salad playbook.
In excerpts from a recently recorded interview with ABC News’ Robin Roberts released June 14 (same day as Trump announced the deal with Iran), Obama weighed in on reports that President Donald Trump’s administration could be on the verge of reaching a new agreement with Iran.
Obama’s assessment?
Before discussing the substance of any potential agreement, Obama made sure to lower expectations. After all, if Trump’s deal ends up being successful, it might invite uncomfortable comparisons to his own agreement. “It is doubtful that any agreement that arises is going to be significantly different or a significant improvement from the deal that we had in the first place,” Obama said.
What followed was a lengthy explanation about diplomacy and conflict that seemed to circle the runway without ever landing. Obama argued that America can’t “bully” or “bomb” its way to solutions. But he is wrong because that’s exactly what happened.
However, more striking than his ignorance on the situation was his delivery. Obama is usually one of the Democratic Party’s most effective speakers, but his interview felt unusually cautious and over- engineered. Every word appeared carefully measured, every sentence heavily qualified. It sounded less like the Obama who electrified audiences in 2008 and more like one of Kamala Harris’ famously meandering attempts to explain a simple point in the most complicated way possible.
The timing is also difficult to ignore.
Trump has spent years blasting Obama’s 2015 Iran nuclear agreement as one of the worst foreign- policy deals ever negotiated. So with reports that Trump may be close to securing his own agreement with Iran, nobody should expect Obama (or the Democrats) to start handing out congratulations or Nobel Peace Prize nominations.
The script is fairly predictable. Before a deal, they’ll say Trump is handling it wrong. During the negotiations, they’ll say he’s moving too slowly or too recklessly. After a deal, they’ll argue it doesn’t go far enough. And if the agreement actually works? Expect many of the same critics to say it’s just a recycled version of Obama’s deal.
In other words, if Trump fails, he’ll get the blame. If Trump succeeds, Obama gets the credit.