Om Pandya, Staff Writer
Ideology: Conservative | Writing From: New York City
Americans should be embarrassed by Obama’s actions in Japan and fearful of his foreign policy.
I am sure that by now the picture and video of Obama bowing to Emperor Akihito of Japan has circulated far and wide, but just to do it justice I would like to describe the scene. Obama approached the slight Japanese figurehead and bowed so low that his face was parallel to the ground. Akihito, the son of the infamous Japanese emperor Hirohito, acknowledged the bow with a smile, not a reciprocal bow as is custom in Japanese culture, 
and watched as Obama then bowed slightly to the Empress.
Now, this is not an assault on Emperor Akihito; from what I have heard, he is a dignified and wise public figure in Japan and around the world. But the fact that just a few days after Veterans Day, when men and women who fought and bled for our nation stood together to commemorate their friends who died in combat, Obama was acknowledging his (and therefore our) inferiority to symbolic head of a nation that subjected almost 12,000 American soldiers to an atrocity we know as the Bataan Death March. Should he have shown respect to the emperor? Yes, but as one leader treats another, not as a subservient aide greeting his boss. A viral video by the College Republicans of the University of Connecticut shows a slideshow of meetings between Akihito and many other heads of state and ambassadors in which none of them bow. I do not think our leader is any inferior to the others.
Many Democrats have attempted to play this off as a sign of respect and cultural understanding, praising the fact that we have a leader who is sensitive to other cultures. Sensitive? Sensitive to other cultures was George W. Bush, whose famous picture in which he holds hands with Crown Prince Abdullah was circulated by liberal bloggers to counter a backlash against the Obama bow. Holding hands in the Arab culture is a sign of trust and friendship, qualities that are essential between equal allies. While George Bush was hated in many parts of the world for his (arguably unnecessary) aggressive foreign policy in regard to terrorism, he was effective on many other foreign policy issues and commanded respect – different from the adoration that Obama receives – from our allies. Bush’s worries about his global popularity rating didn’t stop him from confronting Russia about their relation to Iran or pressuring China to help contain North Korea. On these two issues Obama continues to play it politically safe, stroking the egos of leaders and telling them they are doing a great job while dangerous nations militarize.
Back in April Obama was thoroughly bashed for his (denied) bow to King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, but it was easily dismissed as a rookie mistake. Now, more than a year after his election he needs to realize that diplomacy is more than getting people to like you; it is a strategic mix of carrots and sticks. In October I wrote about “The Obama Doctrine”, highlighting the dangerous path that a diplomacy of concessions will take us down, with the message being even clearer today. Showing yourself off to the world as someone who yields easily and seeks to please is a dangerous tactic. Had Obama bowed to the emperor in private there would be much less of a issue, since Emperor Akihito is a genuine humanitarian and he personally carries no role in international negotiations, nor is his nation’s interest drastically opposed to our own. But Obama’s reputation as a pleaser, which has already been instrumental in Iran rejecting a concession we tried to give, has been further magnified in the eyes of the world.
It is in the nature of politicians to be well liked, and to believe that they alone are blessed with the persuasive power to use diplomacy in all situations. Neville Chamberlain suffered from this syndrome when he thought Hitler might back down if he just met Chamberlain and found him to be a likable person. While America and its people may be more liked by the rest of the world with Obama at the head of our government, foreign relations do not revolve around public opinions. We need a leader who is willing to let the world know that the United States is a force to be respected, not a nation that can be extorted or intimidated into making decisions.
The stupidity of this article astounds me.
Dylan obviously saw the picture, assumed the article was only about that picture, and that made his comment.
This was a great article. It’s not necessarily about Obama about being naive and bowing when it isn’t appropriate, but about Obama’s general attitude toward foreign policy.
Yes, by bowing to the Emperor of Japan, our treacherous President is signaling that our policymakers can be, “extorted or intimidated into making decisions.” I understand (and largely agree with) criticism of Obama’s bow but the parallels to Chamberlain and Hitler boggle the rational mind.
“This is a great article”
Ah, modesty at its finest.
Also, thanks for bringing up Adolf Hitler. You officially lose.
On V-J Day the unthinkable happened in Japan. A demigod emperor unconditionally surrendered to a Westerner. We didn’t bow then, we don’t need to bow now. President Obama is not an ambassador. He is a fellow head of state. At a minimum a peer. He should act with the dignity as such, and not try to “please”.
No where did I say Obama is toAkihito as Chamberlain is to Hitler. I clearly stated how Obama’s attitude is very similar to Chamberlain’s and it could lead us down a dangerous road. I don’t know what you are reading if you think that I meant Obama bowing = Chamberlain appeasing but it wasn’t this article.
The need for the right to cling to idiotic and minuscule issues such as whether Obama has the correct degree in his bows is indicative of an inability to come up with decent counterproposals to the policies of his administration.
““This is a great article”
Ah, modesty at its finest.”
Um, I, being a different person than the person who wrote the article, am allowed to say that I think it’s great. Modesty has nothing to do with anything? Don’t know what you’re talking about?
And please, as if the left didn’t cling to things like “BUSH IS STUPID” or pictures of him with the Women’s Olympic Volleyball Team as opposed to, you know, criticizing his actual policies. But your comment demonstrates that you aren’t willing to do any research, as the Republicans have offered alternatives for most Obama policies. Clearly, you haven’t bothered to look for them.
You really understand how the internet works, do you Mr. Jacobs?
don’t* rather. Apparently I don’t understand simple contractions.
What does that even mean?
The bow was unnecessary but displaying respect for a local custom as the world’s most transparently powerful head of state does not signal Chamberlain’s attitude vis-a-vis Hitler. You openly admit that you’re asserting this equivalence but attempt to control its ridiculousness with a qualification about the literal difference between a bow and the Munich Pact. The parallel remains and is emblematic of the increasingly irrational scrutiny that confronts our President.
This is ridiculous. Most Japaneses news agencies didn’t even cover the story because it is customary in Japan. Obama did the right thing in bowing. He didn’t show deference nor did he concede anything with his bow, he merely sought to adhere to a long established tradition in Japan.
Also the Emperor is like the Queen of England: a cultural figure head with very little real power. If he had bowed to the PM of Japan, it would be a slightly different story. Personally I’d rather my president show his cultural savy and bow to a meaningless figure head rather then hold hands with the King of a Country with a dismal human rights record but in the grand scheme on IR both are pretty meaningless.
In addition, the parallels drawn between Obama and Chamberlain would be funny if it didn’t show the lack of understanding by conservatives of world history. Obama bowing to Emperor Akihito is not even in the same galaxy as Chamberlain effectively signing Czechoslovakia away to the horrors of the Third Reich for almost 8 years.
And before anyone points out Japans war crimes during WW2 in an attempt to discredit my line “rather then hold hands with the King of a Country with a dismal human rights record”, I am talking about Japan in a modern context. Japan today is one of the most industrialized, civilized, and peaceful societies as opposed to Saudi Arabia which is still effectively a brutal monarchy with public executions, grossly unfair laws when it comes to womens rights, and state organized religious oppression.
Clark,
I’m pretty sure Om demonstrated in the article that the bow did not show Obama’s “cultural savvy.” It isn’t customary for a U.S. president to bow to a foreign leader.
Thanks for implying – no, stating outright – that conservatives don’t understand world history because of one modest parallel.
And while you’re on the topic of greeting people with dismal human rights records, what about Obama practically falling over himself to greet Hugo Chavez earlier this year?
Read the part where I say that Japanese interests are not drastically opposed to our own. Obama bowing means almost nothing within our relations with Japan but it is a signal to the rest of the world.
When someone compares bowing to a meaningless figure head with no real power to handing Czechoslovakia on a golden platter to Hitler:dictator of the Third Reich I think it is with-in reason to question their grasp and view of world history.
@ Alec
Your right I was actually a little pissed off when Obama did that. That being said, regardless these types of incidents should be left for what they are…drivel stirred up by the media into sensationalist stories. In 2 weeks this won’t be a story anymore and we can get back to real issues like health-care, Afghanistan etc.
@ Om
If you really want to talk about signals sent to the world we could start with a pointless war in Iraq back-ed up by faulty intelligence, or perhaps detention of “unlawful-combatants” for years with out even 1 visit from a lawyer or the Bush doctrine of pre-emptive war. etc etc. I’m sure you can find as many examples from democratic years in office but the point is this bow is not on the same level as other “signals” sent by our country recently
Wow Clark you really didn’t read well enough. I did not ever compare the two actions. I actually did not come even close. I compared Obama’s overall mentality to foreign policy to Chamberlain’s. Also, hindsight is 20/20, who knows what Obama would have done in Chamberlain’s shoes? I sure am not confident he would not have tried to appeased.
IF your not comparing Obama/Chamberlain why did you even bring Chamberlain up. I think its pretty clear that paralells are being drawn and comparisons made. Then you say “I did not ever compare the two actions.” and then two lines later you say “I compared Obama’s overall mentality to foreign policy to Chamberlain’s. Also, hindsight is 20/20, who knows what Obama would have done in Chamberlain’s shoes? I sure am not confident he would not have tried to appeased.” please tell how that is not a comparison
IT DOESN’T MATTER.
The amount of ink that has been spilled over this issue is quite frankly more disturbing than any ridiculously people choose to read into it.
Honestly, the first time I heard about this, I thought it some sort of joke — something from the Onion, maybe — but the idea that people actually feel the need to debate this or read into it as if his bow were The Scarlet Letter and this were comp. lit. class is insane.
If you want to talk about Obama’s ACTUAL foreign policy then FINE, but don’t talk about the painfully boring details of every visit as if they are some marker of ideology.
And by the way, yes, my high school-level Marxist analysis of the Scarlet Letter, in which I claimed the presence of class struggle due to the fact that the governor’s hat was taller than Hester Prynne’s hat, is leagues more legit than this shenanigans.
UGH.
“Americans should be embarrassed by how much right-wing pundits care about inane details and fearful of how much influence they have on discourse in this country.”
Fixed that for you.
Noah,
Only right-wing pundits care about what you call inane details?