No Hope Without Audacity

President Obama will give his first State of the Union speech tonight. A lot of hope was invested in him, and no doubt the year took its toll on his image, credibility, and appeal, notwithstanding his Nobel Peace Prize speech, as well as other speeches that truly moved his listeners. The cynics, therefore, have a lot to feel good about.

Tweet

Email

Print

One year on, the administration does not have much to show that is tangible in terms of success in either domestic or foreign policy. The wake-up call in Massachusetts may yet lead to a different presidential style and may let Obama recover lost ground. One can reasonably argue that the groundwork had been laid for results on many issues—but for an impatient world and an aching domestic public, that does not count for much.

In fact, to be fair, one can also claim that the world, at least world public opinion, had been very patient with the American President. It took his election as a marvel, listened carefully to his pronouncements, and expected him to right the wrongs of his predecessor. Perhaps the expectations were unreasonable, perhaps the president did not show the kind of boldness that the circumstances of his election warranted.

For me, the Obama presidency was to be a “restoration” presidency. Domestically, the economy had to be on a different track, its priorities changed and the mindset of those who led the neo-liberal globalization process was no longer to dominate the way economic policy was conceived.

Internationally, the new President had to make amends with a world that was offended by, and grew exhausted with, the aggressive policies of his predecessor, particularly in Bush’s first term. American prestige and the legitimacy of American power were carelessly wasted in pursuit of arrogant policies that denied the realities of the world in the 21st century. American power, itself, in many of its attributes, was diminished considerably.

Obama did ameliorate the American image. He reached out to many adversaries and tried to make amends with allies. He was brutally criticized at home for being an appeaser, the president who wanted to manage “America’s decline”. After eight years of Bush’s bravado, the world would not take such criticism seriously. On Iran, Obama, so far, has competently managed a difficult situation both on the nuclear issue and on Iran’s domestic turmoil. The
decision to send more troops to Afghanistan, where there is no possibility of a military solution or of “foreigner’s peace”, hurt him globally.

He did not get much help from allies, received some support from Russia, appeared snubbed by China during his visit there, as well as during the Copenhagen summit. He was accommodating to the limit and bent over backward to find a common ground. I am afraid most of the world saw his effort as a sign of weakness, symbolized perhaps in that (in)famous photograph in Japan, bowing to the Emperor. Ultimately, however much the world might resent the United States, it also wants to see it in charge, since there is no other force around to do so.

On this last point, the failure of the president to deliver on his opening position on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and live up to the promises of his Cairo speech, damaged him considerably. The solution to the Palestinian plight may not and will not solve all of the Middle East’s troubles, but it is the most symbolic issue around. And the sight of yet another American President being humiliated by an intransigent Israeli Prime Minister did a lot of harm to the goodwill generated by the Cairo speech. More importantly, it reduced the credibility of the president.

If anything, this president has a record of learning from his mistakes. In light of the less-than-edifying record of his first year, this is the one reason that leads me to remain hopeful for the remainder of his term.