Marco Rubio, among others, believes that Obama is a bad negotiator, the worst since Carter:

I don’t know what [Obama’s] intentions are. His foreign policy is at a minimum naive, and perhaps even truly counterproductive to the future of democracy in the region.

Just last week we imposed sanctions on human rights violators in Venezuela, but the people who are supporting the Venezuelans in conducting those violations — literally the Cubans have taken over the Venezuela government, we’re actually lifting sanctions on them.

How absurd is that? And it’s just par for the course, all of these tyrants around the world know the United States can be had. At a minimum I will say this, the president is the worst negotiator we’ve had as president since at least Jimmy Carter and perhaps in the modern era.

But Rubio is wrong; Obama is not a bad negotiator at all. He is a faux negotiator.

And perhaps Rubio even knows this (the hint being “at a minimum”) but feels he can’t say it or he will be labeled a kook.

But I can say it: Obama’s intentions here were almost certainly to prop up the Castro government and concede to them, and the negotiations were an excuse to do that. There were no reluctant concessions on the part of Obama, there were eager concessions.

As Rich Lowry writes, it’s not so much about whether it was time to loosen economic sanctions or not (reasonable people differ on this), it’s about how it was done:

The rest of Obama’s sweeping revisions — diplomatic relations and the loosening of every economic sanction he can plausibly change on his own — are freely granted, no questions asked. It is quid with no pro quo. Even if you oppose the isolation of Cuba, this is not a good trade.

After waiting out 10 other U.S. presidents, the Castro regime finally hit the jackpot in Obama…

Every dictator around the world must be waiting anxiously for a call or a postcard from Obama. The leader of the free world comes bearing gifts and understanding. He is willing to overlook human-rights abuses. And his idea of burnishing his legacy is to clinch deals with his country’s enemies.

Anyone who has observed Obama over the years ought to know that. Whether it be Iran, the Afghan Taliban (Bergdahl swap), or Cuba, this is his m.o. for “negotiating” (wink, wink) with tyrants.

Comparing Obama to Carter is an insult to Carter, who was a liberal but a patriot with good intentions. Obama does not appear to have good intentions, unless your idea of what’s good for the world is to decrease American power on the international scene, harm its traditional allies, and help its enemies. Unfortunately, there are many people on the left who believe exactly that.

[Neo-neocon is a writer with degrees in law and family therapy, who blogs at neo-neocon.]