The Morning After

When the party's over, you look around, you're still standing in the ...

The job Barack Obama has done of wooing the population of Europe is nothing short of spectacular, were it to be for Europeans to decide the next President of the United States of America, the result would already have been put beyond doubt. However, Obama is not running for election in Berlin, nor Paris, nor London. And even if he were, wooing the voters is all he has done, all points advanced by The Guardian editorial of Saturday 6th of July: The focus in Europe's relationship with Mr Obama needs to be on goals not gush and on doing rather than just feeling good. Obama may be Europe's choice, but he can only be Washington's President. Not all Europeans have grown rosy scales over their eyes just because somebody who isn't Bush has finally emerged to try to replace him. Mr Obama makes some entirely laudable noises about recognising shared history and destiny, and working together in an international spirit of cooperation in the interests common to all humanity. He also demonstrates a grasp of the english language and general social finesse which was sorely lacking in his predecessor, though improving on those qualities hardly demanded much of any newcomer.

[There are those who would see much to cringe at in a Senator from Illinois shaking the hands of No 10's duty policeman, but after all, he is an American]

However, this candidate's campaign, his popularity and his glowing reception in Europe at least, owe much to the legacy of that very same Mr Bush. It's impossible to divorce the enthusiasm for Obama from the relief that Bush must step down, there's a feeling that he can't possibly turn out to be worse than the last one. That's almost definitely justified, but the proof thereof will come through his actions and attitude as President if he gets to that all important Oval Office in November. Let's also not forget, that an election candidate's tour through Europe is, above anything else, directed at winning more votes at home. Consequently, Obama has naturally admitted to and lamented some of the mistakes of the previous administration, but cannot, and perhaps never will, chastise his home country over those things for which many Europeans reserve deep suspicions and harbour animosity towards the US.

Rebuilding a relationship

Conciliation between the old world and the new is a nice idea, but tends to be vital for the projection of US power only up to the point where Washington decides to go it alone. Obama spoke heavily of the need to return to good transatlantic relations between Europe and the USA. He also called on the people to recognise the need for this for the sake of our shared history, destiny, and humanitarian interests. Much of the damage done to the that cause in Europe was done by the United States itself. Relationships are built on mutual respect and trust, both of which took a decisive blow when the United States, backed as ever by the obedient little UK government (though it must be noted, not it's people) lied to and rode roughshod over the UN, an institution set up precisely for the cause of those values Obama championed in Berlin. There, a cooperative body charged with protecting international security and coordinating responses to pertinent and real mutual threats was insulted in the belittling of Hans Blix's lawful weapons inspection efforts, and finally emasculated by the unilateral invasion of a country subject to UN controls and sanctions at the time.

International cooperation in the interests of humanity has a home, and that's where Obama might want to concentrate his efforts on rebuilding it

This exclusion of international input and shared responsibility on the basis of documents and claims which have been overwhelmingly acknowledged to be doctored and overstated did more than any other single action to undermine the image of the US in the eyes of Europeans. If he wants to build a world system where the American contribution to international cooperation is welcome, Obama has much lost ground to make up with its counterparts for his house to be seen to be in order. America’s President can talk about the EU and shared histories, even destinies, if it please him, but the option to pick and choose with which of its members to collaborate is always open also. If missile and radar bases are successfully built in Poland and the Czech Republic, it will not mean that the entire EU supports them. Europeans can be comforted by admirable aspirations toward relationships based on consensus as opposed to the polarising high-handedness which hallmarked the Bush years, but words now will count for nothing when the politics of domestic approval or satisfying the big players in US economics come to the fore.

Trade and Barriers

The Berlin speech has been compared to those of Reagan and Kennedy, and it was exactly Reagan era Friedmanite free-market attitudes which oversaw the privatisation of East Germany’s economy, a process which far from succeeded in equalising the economic situation of the reunified states with those of the West of that country. In that example, ‘free’ outweighed ‘fair’ with consequences that continue to overshadow Central Europe's economic performance to this day. Obama has called for a culture of trade that is free and fair for all, yet 'free' and 'fair' trade have come to describe two opposing sides of economic debate in recent years. The expansion of the European Union to include new, poorer members in its East brings inevitable tensions to its internal single economy. In response to this, a number of states have imposed boundaries to the migration of people from those new states in an attempt to shelter their labour markets and cushion the effects of competition. Competition is a fact of the capitalist system, but for the economy to be fair, sometimes requires that the market be less free.

The free vs fair debate regarding the developing world has not been a quiet one. It remains to be seen what vision Mr Obama has for this arena, to what extent does he believe that developing economies have the right to shelter their growing markets prior to competing on the global stage. Should countries like Iraq, Russia, the states of Southern America and others have the right to manage their national resources (often the basis of their entire economies) as a national asset, or should they be excavated, and sold off at prices determined by, foreign multinationals?

The current generation's most divisive wall

Giving a speech about international cooperation and the interests common to all humanity by the site of the Berlin Wall undoubtedly contributed to the invocation Kennedy and Reagan in the media. However, in this European's estimation, that patch is well and truly taken, Obama could seek to claim his by the world's new most divisive Wall, the one that looms over and creeps across Palestinian land further every month. Writing for The Guardian, Jonathan Steele elaborates on some of the complexities there. For those of us who see nothing good coming from building another division wall, especially one that has the gift of movement to the decided detriment of the Palestinians, Obama missed a trick for what would have been the retro-soundbite of the century. How jaw-dropping and forward thinking the words 'Mr Peres, tear down this wall' would have been, and how they would have fit so beautifully with the location chosen for his European leg highlight speech. But of course nothing like that was ever on the cards. The US is far too heavily invested in Israel, especially since Tehran emphatically turned its rhetorical guns on it.

This is one area the US and EU could sharpen their coordination and resolve to see a free fair and peaceful world. It is unfortunate that the EU has decided to upgrade its cultural and economic relations with Israel, forfeiting the little leverage it has. As for Iran itself, Obama has stated himself committed to, and expectant of European assistance in staring Tehran down over its nuclear program. In the event of serious developments one can only hope that unlike in Iraq, whatever documentation on Iran's pursuit of nuclear weaponry or other wrongdoing that exists is, or will be irrefutable.

these stars haven't yet yellowed

As with so much regarding the golden boy of the moment, it all remains in the future. All that is concrete for now is that he enjoys great approval ratings in the EU, and if America wants to start playing alongside the continent whose old countries it was founded to be better than, Obama is the best chance they have had in a long time. Europe should not count its chickens, altruism has not traditionally been the ticket permitting previous Presidents into office. Even if he does triumph later this year, his first duty will still be to the USA, whatever he determines that to be. The changes on offer through Mr Obama seem to be fixed in the right direction, but their magnitude will be tempered by domestic political reality.

This post also appears on the affiliated blog: http://suite2012.blogspot.com/

mucho