President Obama’s most recent decision not to release torture photographs of detainees at Abughreb prison in Iraq has raised so many eyebrows. Many skeptics and radical think-tanks criticized the president for making a decision that is contradictory and far fetched from his campaign promises.

The question now is: has the president acted in contradiction to his campaign promise or has he taken the rightful policy decision in not making the photographs accessible to the public?

Responding to the above questions requires an in-depth analysis of America’s role, standing and foreign policy across the global political landscape. An analysis of Obama’s decision not to release the photographs falls right along such standing and foreign policy trajectories. It should be noted that since his ascension to power, president Obama has shifted from the hostile policy of his predecessor to a friendlier one in he quest for restoring America’s leadership and influence around the world.

He has not only condemned the use of torture against US detainees in Guantanamo Bay in Cuba and Iraq, but also ordered for a closure of the Gitmo detention facility.

Although he pledged to release torture photographs during the presidential campaign, his most recent decision to overturn such  campaign pledge does not in any way show inconsistency in his leadership, but a rightful and timely decision. Leadership requires flexibility and vision, and that is what he has manifested.

Considering the embodiment of checks and balances in America’s government system, president Obama could not have made such a decision alone. His shift from a campaign pledge of releasing the photographs stems from the institutions that make up such checks and balances. In his analysis of Social Forces, States and World Orders, Robert Fox argued that:

"Institutions are particular ideas and material power which in turn influence the development of ideas and material capabilities. Institutions provide ways of dealing with internal conflicts so as to minimize the use of force."

President Obama must have undoubtedly, consulted the senior cadre of both the US military, legislature and civil society institutions in coming up with such a shift. A good leader listens and seeks ideas and advice. And that is exactly what he did.

Nonetheless, it is tactically viable not to release the photographs. The president’s argument that releasing the photographs will make the work of combat troops in both Afghanistan and Iraq complicated, falls right on track. Tactically, that will create more outrage across the much polarized Muslim world, thus ferment a consolidation and support for extremists and fundamentalists in their quest for undermining US efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Leadership and governance require production that will generate constructive forces across a fragile global political landscape. President Obama has demonstrated exactly such a productive and constructive leadership.

By condemning torture, ordering for a closure of Guantanamo, investigating torture, and not releasing photographs of torture to the public, Obama has demonstrated exactly America’s leadership role in uniting a world that is already deeply divided along dangerous paradigms.

What Obama needs is ensuring a closure of Guantanamo by January 2010, and alleged terrorist suspects receive a fair trial within the frame work of American and international law. The use of military commissions must therefore be carefully pondered to uphold America’s obligation under international law. That is exactly what is needed during these critical times.