“JAMIE” AS HE IS KNOWN IS THE HUBBY OF CHRITIANE AMAPOUR AND THE LAPDOG OF MADELEINE ALBRIGHT WHO CREDITED HIM WITH GIVING HER “FASHION ADVICE”…..HE IS LOOKING FOR A JOB IN THE ADMINISTRATION…RSK

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704575304575297002717908716.html?mod=WSJ_hps_LEFTTopStories

By JAMES P. RUBIN

The Obama administration is an unreliable friend and a faint-hearted adversary. U.S. allies in Europe no longer treasure their ties to the United States. Turkey defies us without paying a price. China’s leaders question our fortitude. Iran’s nuclear weapons program continues unchecked.

So chants a chorus of Republican critics. President Obama’s latest mistake, of course, is to support a U.N. resolution that condemns the Israeli actions that resulted in the death of nine people on the aid flotilla sailing to Gaza.

Have the critics forgotten what happened to respect for the U.S. as a result of eight years of the Republicans having their way on foreign policy?

In international affairs, context matters. The Bush administration repudiated global rules on climate change, treatment of prisoners, and arms control. It rejected the value of alliances, bungling diplomacy before the Iraq war and mismanaging the war’s execution.

These actions left America isolated. As a result, by 2009 allies were less likely to support Washington’s policies. Adversaries, observing this new U.S. isolation and watching our military’s six-year struggle in Iraq and eight-year fight in Afghanistan, were far less intimidated. Nothing Mr. Obama has done or not done in the last 18 months even remotely compares to the damage wrought by his predecessor to America’s international standing and deterrent power.

On the contrary, the Obama administration has restored strained alliances and friendships around the world, while weakening the likes of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Iran and Hugo Chávez in Venezuela. Several studies of international attitudes demonstrate that the election of Mr. Obama, with his call for partnership, respect for international rules on prisoners, and acceptance of the responsibilities associated with climate change, transformed America from a lonely superpower often seen as a threat to international order back into an indispensable leader in Europe, Asia and the Middle East. For example, a 2009 Pew Foundation poll found dramatic increases in U.S. favorability ratings (compared to 2008) across Europe and parts of Asia.

True, the world in 2010 is different than after the fall of Communism, when America’s ability to affect events was at its height. Now power has been redistributed to the East with the rise of China and India; and the greater Middle East is in turmoil, with chaos and terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan and the rise of Shiite influence in Iraq, Hamas in Gaza, and Hezbollah in Lebanon. So, yes, countries like Turkey no longer follow the American line the way they did in the past. And yes, managing China’s rise is more difficult. But the talk of penalizing Turkey and of threatening China to accommodate Washington’s interests is unrealistic.

The best way to restore U.S. influence is to adjust to a changing world. Along with a successful withdrawal of U.S. forces from a relatively stable Iraq and good results from the surge in Afghanistan—two big ifs—that means modernizing our alliances, reorienting global governance from the Group of 7 (primarily American and European) to the Group of 20 (including China, India and others). It also means looking after our finances and our economy while maintaining military supremacy. The Obama administration is doing all this.

Regarding Iran, while it is true we are no closer to a solution to Tehran’s nuclear ambitions today, there have been two important developments. As a result of the Obama administration’s openness to diplomacy and the respect this attitude has garnered, the Iranian government has less support at home, less credibility in the region, and fewer friends in the world. New sanctions imposed at the U.N. last week with the support of Russia and China won’t solve the problem but will complicate Tehran’s nuclear program, ensure that a price is paid for noncompliance, and compound Iran’s isolation.

Meanwhile, other international troublemakers like Hugo Chávez have been unnerved by the president’s popularity and style. Again, that isn’t a solution. But we are clearly better off when the onus is on our adversaries and not on ourselves. As far as enemies like al Qaeda are concerned, they are being systematically destroyed with stepped up air and ground attacks like never before. To oversimplify, the change from Bush to Obama has been nothing but bad news for the bad guys.

Which leaves Israel. In last week’s U.N. debate over the flotilla, the administration wisely agreed to a mild resolution rather than give Israel’s enemies the lengthy public debate and controversy they would have preferred. Given the Netanyahu government’s mishandling of the flotilla, blaming Washington for weakening U.S. Israeli relations is ridiculous. The Obama administration has rightly taken on the painful responsibility of promoting Arab-Israeli peace along with a reinforced commitment to Israeli security.

In light of the Dubai assassination of a Hamas leader (in which Israeli intelligence was heavily criticized by Western governments), the settlement announcement during Vice President Biden’s March visit, and the recent debacle on the Mediterranean, questions about who is undermining Israeli-American relations should be directed toward Jerusalem, not Washington.

Mr. Rubin is an adjunct professor at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs. He was an assistant secretary of state in the Clinton administration.