LyrArc Article Gist
This NYT editorial describes U.S. president Obama's West Point speech as lacking substance and overhyped. Issues of how to tackle relations with a more assertive China and Russia were left unaddressed, and the increase in tensions in Asia and in Europe were left out. Much of the speech used platitudes without spelling out what the U.S. would do, such as saying that there was no question that the U.S. would lead, it was about how it would lead. Questions raised about Obama's handling of foreign affairs will not be addressed by this speech, says NYT. The WSJ editorial on May 29, 2014, expressed a similiar opinion, suggesting that many are asking the same questions about whether there is a policy or whether it is being framed by Mr. Obama's personal preferences to stay out of most foreign issues and focus on domestic affairs, even though this means neglect of issues in which the lack of U.S. leadership will have serious implications for the future. Was the address an attempt to gloss over these obvious deficiencies with Mr. Obama's rhetorical skills?