海角大神

On Sunday, what many estimated to be the largest crowd to appear in the streets of Paris since the city was liberated from the Nazis in 1945聽brought some estimated 1.6 million people into the streets in a show of unity in the wake of the attack on the offices of satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo聽and a kosher supermarket. Along with them were聽some 40 world leaders,聽including leaders from most of the nations of Western Europe, several African nations with ties to France, as well as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud聽Abbas. The United States, meanwhile, was represented by our ambassador to France, and that led many to聽wonder why the US had not sent a higher-ranking representative to the march, especially given the fact that Attorney General Eric Holder was already in Paris for security meetings and neither President Obama nor Vice-President Biden had anything on their schedules this weekend:

Politico鈥檚聽Edward Isaac Dovere聽raised questions:

And聽CNN鈥檚 Jake Tapper, who typically is rather restrained in editorializing, is fairly critical of the administration:

As a preliminary matter, I think it鈥檚 fairly easy to dismiss the criticism that President Obama, or even Vice-President Biden, should have been the one to go to Paris yesterday on a trip that, obviously, would have been very last minute, to say the least. The most obvious reason for this, of course, is the fact that both men travel inside of a security bubble that is unlike anything that any other world leader lives with on a daily basis. Even the simple act of the president traveling the few blocks from the White House to Capitol Hill involves multiple levels of security, closed streets, counter-assault teams on rooftops and, of course, a massive motorcade. All of this follows the president everywhere he goes, whether it is within the United States or on an overseas trip. How, exactly, is security of that type supposed to be reconciled with a crowd of nearly 2 million people at close quarters like the one we saw in Paris yesterday? Quite obviously, it can鈥檛 and had President Obama traveled to Paris this weekend, he likely would not have been able 聽to participate in the march for this very reason. The same likely would have been true for Vice-President Biden, who also travels inside an extensive security bubble whenever he travels. One can, perhaps, criticize the extent to which we have allowed the presidential security bubble to grow, but it is a reality of the office and the idea that the president can just pick up and decide to take a trip to a foreign country on a whim is simply absurd. Certainly, the Secret Service is capable of putting together last minute security plans when they are required to, even for international trips, but those types of last minute trips are unusual for presidents for a reason: because they are difficult to plan and, quite often, disruptive. Given all of that, the idea of the president or vice-president going to Paris to march with other world leaders, which in the end is merely a symbolic act in any event, seems to be rather silly and likely聽would have led to logistical issues that would have taken away from the real purpose of the march, which was for the people of Paris themselves not an opportunity for politicians to get their picture in the paper.

At the same time, I think one can argue that it would have been appropriate for the United States to have been represented by someone above a mere ambassador at an event that had heads of state, prime ministers, and foreign ministers in attendance. As noted, Attorney General Eric Holder was present in Paris on Sunday and even did several of the Sunday morning shows via satellite from Paris. Why he was unable to attend the rally is unclear. In the end, though, I have agree with聽Ron Fournier聽that the administration made a mistake here, but that it certainly was not a major one nor does it demonstrate anything about American commitment to the War On Terror:

It鈥檚 also worth noting that had Obama gone to Paris many of the president鈥檚 critics on the right would have accused the president of making the march 鈥渁bout him鈥� rather than a way for the people of France to express their grief and outrage over the attacks and their support for the ideas of liberty that have long been an important part of their national culture. Had Biden been sent as the representative, then the comments would have been all about how we were somehow 鈥渋nsulting鈥� France by sending a 鈥渂uffoon鈥� like the vice-president to such an important event in the capitol of one of our closest allies. In that sense, the administration would have been criticized no matter what it did. So, yes, it was perhaps an error to not send someone higher ranking than an ambassador to what turned out to be the biggest rally in modern French history, but the idea that the president himself should have gone is really rather silly.

鲍辫诲补迟别:听White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said on Monday that they now聽recognize it was a 鈥渕istake鈥澛爐o not send someone of a rank higher than ambassador to Paris:

Perhaps more significantly, it turns out that聽the world leaders didn鈥檛 really take part in the march at all:

Had Obama gone, this, no doubt, would have been the basis for his critics to attack him.

Doug Mataconis appears on the Outside the Beltway blog at http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/.