...Share This Article on: Digg! Reddit! Del.icio.us! Google! Live! Facebook! Slashdot! Technorati! StumbleUpon! Add this page to Mister Wong Newsvine!Furl!Print This Page  |  

Send to a Friend:





Send to a friend:
Die Zeit, Germany

Is Obama a Flop?



By Christoph Bertram

Whoever wants to put [Obama] under pressure to succeed right now is either an ignoramus or someone who doesn’t share his goals.

Translated By Albert Minnick

19 November 2009

Edited by Ste­fanie Carignan


Germany - Die Zeit - Original Article (German)

Although he was elected one year ago and has been president for just ten months, Barack Obama is being blamed for not yet having changed the world.

It’s really remarkable. Barack Obama inherited a mess from his predecessor George W. Bush. With Obama, no foreign policy problem is as far from a solution as it had been with Bush. And in contrast to what Bush believed, America is far from being powerful enough to force its will upon the world anymore. The United States and its president are now relying much more on the approval and cooperation of other countries. To their complete misery, the gamblers of the international finance world, who were allowed to run rampant and unchecked during the Bush era, gave America and the world one of the worst financial and economic crises ever as a Christmas present.

If necessary, the Hercules of legend, who cleaned up King Augeas’s stables simply by channeling two rivers through them, would have been able to cope with these challenges on the spot. For a mortal like Obama, on the other hand, there was nothing else to do but start by changing the atmosphere, then getting his country behind him, and subsequently winning over the partners needed for cooperation. Each of these steps takes time, much time.

How does one do this? He starts by making his intentions clear early on. Shortly after his arrival in the White House, Obama ushered in radical changes in key American foreign policy issues: relations with the Islamic world, climate policy, the relationship with Russia, disarmament policy, the nuclear dispute with Iran, and the Middle East peace process. No other American president has pledged his word in so many areas and laid out the terms by which his performance will be measured as early into his term as Obama.

But even this approach really seems to shock his critics on both sides of the Atlantic. There are only nice words! The man does not act; he only continues to campaign. He is naïve, offers talks to Iran without concessions, and has unilaterally abandoned the missile shield in Eastern Europe. And what has he actually done thus far to carry out his plans? Nicolas Sarkozy, the restless French leader, is even said to have expressed doubts to Russian President Medvedev about whether Obama really has what it takes to be a political leader.

When American neoconservatives and their European imitators talk like this, this much is clear: They want to prove that they have been correct all along. Obama is being deflated to rehabilitate Bush and the naysayers themselves.

But criticism is also coming from those who had placed their hopes on the new man in the White House and are now blaming him for still not having performed miracles. In the news media, which likes to write people off early anyway, it has become quite popular to list, in all seriousness, everything the US President has not yet succeeded in doing: no concessions from North Korea or Iran, no halt to new Israeli settlements in Palestine, and no success in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Whoever talks like this exposes himself as being either naïve or malicious. Each of these conflicts has a long history full of setbacks and mistrust. Who can then seriously believe that they can be solved by waving a magic wand? Furthermore, Obama’s approaches to these problems are often controversial not only among the polarized American public and in Congress, but also within his own team. An example of this is speculation that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, during a recent trip to Jerusalem, suddenly distanced herself from Obama’s demand for a halt to new Israeli settlements on the West Bank.

Ever since Obama announced his foreign policy initiatives this past spring, the obstacles to their implementation have been mounting both at home and abroad. If anything, they can only be achieved gradually, not taken by storm.

The crucial benchmark in the assessment of Barack Obama therefore cannot be that he has yet to perform any miracles. Rather, it will be whether he maintains the resolve necessary to realize his ambitious goals over the long run. This is the standard he should be judged by some day. Meanwhile, whoever wants to put him under pressure to succeed right now is either an ignoramus or someone who doesn’t share his goals.



CLICK HERE FOR ORIGINAL VERSION

Comments

            

One Response to “Is Obama a Flop?”

  1.  Vote: Add rating 0  Subtract rating 0   Katie212 Says:

    You know what I find most inter­est­ing as an amer­i­can cit­i­zen is how lit­tle other coun­tries actu­ally know about Amer­i­cans liv­ing in the USA. I am an inde­pen­dent who did­not vote for GWB either of the two times that he was elected to the sta­tus of pres­i­dent of the United States. Many of my fel­low cit­i­zens and I found the neo­con regime bar­baric and under Bush came the “Patriot Act” which of course was­not patri­otic at all. Then he began uncon­sti­tu­tional war­rant­less wire­tap­ping of amer­i­can cit­i­zens. Bush would over­ride the US con­sti­tu­tional rules of law by using uncon­sti­tu­tional sign­ing statements.He then went on to uti­liz­ing exec­u­tive pow­ers to under­mine any­thing that con­gress might place in the amer­i­can cit­i­zens favor(which does­not hap­pen often at all). Cam­eras were put in place that watch our every move and serves the dic­ta­to­r­ial police state. pro­test­ers could­not have free­dom of speech to voice their objec­tions and usu­ally get put in jail. Bush got rid of posse Comi­ta­tus which doesn’t allow for sol­diers to mil­i­tar­ily patrol our streets. We have police offi­cers now that are all Fed­er­al­ized under Bush, thus they are loyal to the fed­eral gov­ern­ment and donot pro­tect and serve the cit­i­zens any longer. The police now look like black tur­tle swat teams and abuse cit­i­zens rights. Bush uncon­sti­tu­tion­ally and ille­gally and pre­emp­tively started a war in Iraq killing mil­lions of inno­cent civil­ians. The whole world now knows that he lied about WMD as of course NONE were found. Bush then stated that Iraq had chem­i­cal weapons and a few were found that my coun­try of the USA sold to Iraq in the 1st place. Of course the Bush regime neo­cons would never tell the amer­i­can peo­ple this. Amer­ica has been uncon­sti­tu­tion­ally at war with Afghanistan also for sev­eral years and only GOD knows when it will end. We are there mainly to guard the main pipeline for oil, and to guard the huge crop of pop­pie plants and to make sure that they make it to mar­ket for a hefty profit. With that said, I would to also let you know that pres­i­dent Obama promised many things dur­ing his cam­paign as many can­di­dates who run for elec­tions do. 1st off he promised to get rid of the uncon­sti­tu­tional “Patriot Act” which he recently and secretly resigned in order to con­tinue with GWBs police state. He will­not rein­state posse comi­ta­tus so sol­diers can just patrol the streets like they do in 3rd world coun­tries. We sup­pos­edly have police for that duty,but I explained this ear­lier. Obama promised to get rid of dic­ta­to­r­ial sign­ing state­ments and said he would NEVER use them. Well, chalk that up to another fail­ure to keep his promise. As the arti­cle alluded to was that Obama just hasn’t been given enough time to effect “change.” Well, no sign­ing state­ments isnot a promise that is hard to keep ok? Obama now of course uses exec­u­tive pow­ers to over­ride con­gress. Gitmo? Nope still open for busi­ness. How about try­ing to allow pho­tos that would have pun­ished the tor­tur­ers? Nope, he sealed and clas­si­fied them so noone could gain access for any tri­als to be held or any jus­tice to be served.He con­tin­ues GWBs wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and threat­ens Iran with sanc­tions. Not to men­tion Iran has now dropped the US dol­lar and the US gov­ern­ment doesn’t like this one bit. We con­tinue forces and fight­ing also in Pak­istan. Our mil­i­tary remains in most every coun­try through­out the world. There is so much more etc.. My response to your arti­cle is sim­ple. Oba­mas image is like a “brand” of some­thing new and of “Change.” His words flowed so elo­quently until the teleprompters fall to the floor. For when this occurs, you find that under­neath it all is mere words and fluff and it was the pow­er­ful cor­po­ra­tions and lob­by­ists that bought and paid for this “brand and image” of Obama. Obama has­not enacted on any of his promises when run­ning for pres­i­dent and has only esca­lated GWBs old poli­cies. GWB and Obama may look and sound dif­fer­ent, but their “Actions” have been the exact same dic­ta­to­r­ial tyrrany. Words are cheap and mean absolutely noth­ing, for it is ones actions that speak vol­umes of ones true character.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.