A whole lot of self-serving nonsense and false narratives in that, but to be expected. Obama doesn't get to absolve himself of the worsening situation in that region over the last eight years.
It's true that in the context of the people he's surrounded by, he is a moderating influence, but he also buys into a lot of the bullshit - whether knowingly or unknowingly.
Yes, a rather self-serving account to cover up his dilettantism and failures in foreign policy.
Iraq was dumped by imposing a set of conditions on the Iraqi government specifically designed for refusal, so as to create plausible excuses.
Libya was dumped almost immediately after the bombing stopped. It was this which created instability, not the initial attack. I will however admit that the blame is only half-justified, though; the peoples of US and Europe wanted a short "go in, bomb them flat, go out", and in that respect everybody delivered completely. Problem is, that shit don't work IRL.
Syria was a total and complete fuckup. You can't keep on drawing lines in the sand one after another as they get stepped over. It's international politics, not hopscotch. You either do what you threaten to do, or keep quiet in the first place. Same with support: you either keep out of the way and let Assad fuck up some poor bastards, or you start cracking heads. Vacillation is bad, and Hillary is completely correct in claiming that kumbayas and generic platitudes do not make solid principles for engaging other political actors, particularly ones who do not believe in the same values as you.
The Asian pivot is basically on life-support, because, again, he let his naive worldview guide his judgment. Fact is, many Asian countries hate each other almost as much as they fear and resent Chinese encroachment.
