“They are taking a significant political risk when they do these kinds of things, when they make any kind of deviation from the status quo,” said Dan Drezner, a professor at Tufts University’s Fletcher School. “These sorts of things generate all kinds of blowback. They have to think the blowback is worth it, otherwise making the changes would be both stupid and thankless.”
The administration defends the moves, saying that by needlessly antagonizing or alienating nations and groups, it can make it harder for the U.S. to build alliances against them.
That’s why Obama’s Muslim outreach speech included references to people who carry out violence – but without the word “terrorism,” which became almost a calling card of the Bush administration and its emphasis on the war on terror (a term even the Bush White House eventually dropped.)
At a recent briefing, the State Department defended the decision to move away from “Islamic radicalism.”
Join the conversation as a VIP Member