Why the Nation and the World Need Barack Obama

The winner of the presidential election will inherit a perfect storm of problems, both economic and international. He will face the most difficult opening day agenda of any president since -- and I say this quite seriously -- the man who saved the Union, Abraham Lincoln. But a more instructive precedent is 1933, when Franklin Roosevelt offered inspiring rhetoric and "bold experimentation" to a nation facing economic meltdown and a breakdown in public confidence.

For me, the choice is quite simple -- and not simply because I am, by temperament and history, a Democrat. The long and intense political campaign has revealed huge differences in positions, style, and personal qualities of the two candidates. And the conclusion seems clear.

JUDGMENT. John McCain has shown throughout his career a penchant for risk-taking; in his memoirs, he proudly calls himself a gambler. His selection of Sarah Palin, a charismatic but spectacularly unqualified candidate, as his running mate, is just the most glaring of many examples of the real McCain. His bravery in combat attests to his patriotism, courage and toughness, but his judgment has been found sorely lacking time and time again over his career.

Barack Obama is tough too, but in a different way. No one should underestimate how difficult it was to travel his road, against incredible odds, to the edge of the presidency. But where McCain is impulsive and emotional, Obama is low-key and unemotional. He makes his judgments in a calm and methodical manner; McCain's impulsiveness is anathema to Obama, and rightly so; one cannot play craps with history. Having seen so many political leaders falter under pressure, I prize this ability above most others. And Barack Obama has it.

THE FINANCIAL CRISIS. The first priority will be the international financial crisis. Since the crisis hit, Obama has been calm and, indeed, presidential -- he consulted the best advisory team in the nation, weighed each course of action carefully, and then issued a series of precise, calm statements. Meanwhile, McCain veered bizarrely, issuing contradictory statements throughout the crisis, "suspending" his campaign (while continuing to campaign), and urging that the first debate be canceled (when it was all the more needed). Advantage to Obama.

FOREIGN POLICY. The most explicit differences are over Iraq, Iran, and Russia. But there are deeper differences. McCain's positions, with the notable exception of climate change, suggest that he would simply try to carry out Bush policies more effectively. Obama offers a different approach to foreign policy. By starting the drawdown of combat troops from Iraq, he would change the image and policies of America immediately. By engaging Iran in talks that would cover not only the nuclear issue but other aspects of Iran's destabilizing role in the region, he would either reach agreements that lowered the dangers from Iran, or he would mobilize a stronger international coalition to isolate Iran. Either way, engaging Iran is the right policy, and it is hard to understand why Bush and McCain have continued to hold out against such an obvious policy change, which, if carried out with firmness, will not compromise America or Israel's national security.

On Russia since its invasion of Georgia, Obama and his running mate, Joe Biden (who was the first member of Congress to visit Georgia after the invasion), stress helping Georgia rebuild its economy and maintain its independence in the face of a continuing Russian campaign against it. McCain, on the other hand, wants to punish Russia by such actions as expelling them from the Group of 8. Such measures may ultimately be necessary, but they do not help Georgia survive as an independent democracy. And even after the outrage in Georgia, there are issues of common interest on which the West and Moscow must work, such as energy and climate change. This was true even during the Cold War, and remains true today, yet McCain seems not to recognize it.

LEADERSHIP. In the end, presidential elections come down to the intangibles of leadership. The vote for president is a sort of private contract directly between each voter and his or her preferred choice. Who do you want to see on your television screen for the next four years? Who do you wish to entrust the nation's fate to?

And here again, the contrasting styles of the two men offer a clear choice between a calm and confident man and a highly emotional one, between a major change in the nation's direction and a minor one, between a combative style and a more conciliatory one. Finally, in a year when the Democrats are certain to increase their majority in both Houses, an Obama victory would offer the Democrats control of both the legislative and executive branches for the first time since 1994, and with it the possibility of legislative achievement after years of stalemate. After so many years of polarization at home and unilateralism abroad, the choice for president seems clear.

Richard Holbrooke is a former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and the chief architect of the 1995 Dayton Peace Agreement that ended the war in Bosnia.

Comments

[Diplomacy]

YES! The choice for President is CLEAR.

BARACK OBAMA!

The WORLD awaits with HOPE & ANTICIPATION!

BARACK OBAMA IS THE LEADER FOR THIS TIME!!!

BARACK OBAMA THE 44TH PRESIDENT OF THE "UNITED" STATES OF AMERICA!

Canadians support BARACK OBAMA!

[Photofarm]

Obama hasn't picked the best economic advisers possible, he picked the Carter team. I remember Carter's years in the White House, they were the worst I've seen in my lifetime. ( I'm 48 ).

Obama has glowing rhetoric, but his past actions don't match the words. What he proposes economically has been tried in the past, and has always resulted in failure.

McCain isn't perfect by any stretch of the imagination. His only saving grace is he probably won't over react with government policies that will prolong the problems. Several studies point out that FDR's meddling actually lengthened the Great Depression, not shortening it as too many people wrongly believe.

The 2008 election is really depressing, no matter who I choose, things will get worse in the next 4 years, the trick is trying to figure which will make things less worse.

[thedirtman]

Globally, people are ready for optimism. Only Obama could deliver it.

[Debbie1996]

President Sarkozy views Obama stance on Iran as "utterly immature" -

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1031943.html

[ProudAmerican23]

I might have to agree with Sarkozy on that issue. Negotation sounds so nice when it actually works, but if you dive into the history on several hotspots you will find its rarely sucessful, heres a few examples; Negotators from the UN were working in Saravo negotating when they were pummeled (leading to a US lead mission).
We negotated to keep UN weapon inspectors in Iraq thru the 90's (they were thrown out, which helped lead several international intellegence agencys to believe Saddam actually had WMD's)
We negotiated with North Korea not to build reactors with out IAEA monitoring (2 months ago they thru the IAEA out and restarted a nuke program... yesterday they threatened to level South Korea)

[Lionsden]

I'm just a regular Jane six-pack (soda, of course). I'm from a blue/pink collar background (dad in construction, mom a waitress).

I have no fine credentials like Ambassador Holbrooke, or Senators Obama and McCain, but I know what I see.

I see Mr. Holbrooke telling us his preference for which Council On Foreign Relations member he prefers in the White House.

Far too many CFR policies and members wind up in positions of power for me to ignore the influence of the CFR.

We are just choosing between two of its distinguished members.
To me, that is not a choice.

[Frannyvida]

What insults me about comments like this is that your Repub. nominees keep bringing up the workd "choice". That's the current law that they want to bring down, when it's due to that choice that they even have one. It's the blind leading the blind.

[Lionsden]

How is my saying Obama and McCain are on the same team (the CFR team) implying that the republican nominees are MY nominees?

What causes you to assume I'm a republican?

[cheforacle]

The CFR is composed of members who vary widely in their views. At some times in history they have had more influence than at other times. Most Presidents have ignored most of its members. The notion that, because someone who espouses an opinion is also a member of the CFR, there is some CFR-motivated conspiracy that the speaker is pushing is no less ridiculous than saying that because my grandfather was a Mason his support for Israel (which stemmed from his passion as an Orthodox Jew) was based on that membership rather than his religious afflliation which was actually the full reason.

[prcleburne]

I listened to an Obama campaign speech this morning, and I am listening to Sarah Palin. The contrast between their audiences is striking : The Obama crowd cheers repeatedly , while boos predominate at the Palin rally. These responses reflect the speakers' messages. One speaks of hope and change ; the other of negativity and division .

[wmfor]

Of course what you call "the possibility of legislative achievement after years of stalemate" is what McCain now calls the horror of one-party rule, something that bothered the Republicans not in the least in 2000.

[ohiomark]

We don't need socialism.

Socialism is spreading misery evenly.

I don't want to live in Venezuela.

If you want someone to spread your wealth around, then let Hugo do it.

[LetMeUnderstandThis]

Ignorance is bliss

[JPHR]

There is a whole spectrum spectrum of socialism, but your immediate association of socialism with Chavez makes we wonder whether that nuance has escaped you. Taxes in the US have always been progressive. Bush only made them less progressive. That means that some 90% of the population had to pay more relative to the top 10% (most probably the redistribution of income under Bush was even worse). Buffet even complained that he had to pay less taxes percentage wise than his secretary. You consider that fair?
Western Europe practices in various degrees some socialism. That guarantees access to health care, education, housing, less economic inequality. That rate om homelessness in the US would considered obscene in Europe. That same socialism for instance does not give those predatory credit companies free reign like in the US. You ought to compare the terms of supporting banks in Europe with those Paulson is using. You might learn something.
Perhaps some research and some common sense might serve you better that only echoing McCain's talking points.

[ohiomark]

The whole idea of a "progressive" tax system is unfair to those who achieve.

We either need a flat tax or the "Fair Tax" (consumption tax). Everyone should pay the same percentage.

Punishing success and rewarding laziness will NOT succeed in funding a government the way it should be funded.

Lower taxes always generates more revenue to the government (look it up).

We don't need more taxes, we need more taxpayers.

[leticia32]

Bush has been spreading my wealth around for some time: Halliburton, and we sure have not gotten our money's worth there, and all the other war profiteers, for example. The Wall Street bail out is a classic example of spreading the wealth around. I am on social security and I am glad it was not privatized. I paid into it in the beginning with my first summer job at age 12. I was a public school teacher for 40 years. I can tell you there is not a lot of wealth spread there. McCain says we can't throw money at public education, but Wall Street and oil corporations are okay. Previously, the fear mongering term was communism, this time around it's socialism. It's not going to happen. Relax. Send some money to your favorite charity. I thought Jesus said to share.

[bobh]

And the nation and the world need Richard Holbrooke as Secretary of State, too.

[MilwaukeeDan]

bob, holbrooke is a neocon, he is credited for the Dayton Peace Accords. Have you been to Bosnia? Didn't think so.

[lemekid]

The case for a stolen election again looks to have already been built by the neocons in these last few weeks. One has to look at the ACORN vote fraud controversy, the questioning of Obama's birth certificate, the recorded audio of Obama's 2001 interview, the Ayers association and a few others that are just popping up.

What is happening here is that these issues or cases are laying the ground work to be the factors that will be blamed upon after the election is over as the root causes of Obama's loss. But in relaity, these are just to mask the truth that the election has been stolen once again thru the Diebold electronic machines.

As a foreigner, America has to be very careful about one thing. If this election will be a stolen one again, the US loses all credibility left and hence the death of the Democracy it so preached around the world. This will definitely lead to other things around the globe and there will a lot of harder times ahead.

The truth of the matter is that the world is really controlled by international bankers which has more power that nations itself. I hope people do a lot of research about these things that I've talked about here to understand whats going on.

[wmfor]

Of course the ACORN nonsense is precisely for the reason you said. But it's going to be pretty funny if McCain blames his loss on Mickey Mouse casting an illegal vote.

[flifishun]

Thousands of voters have been purged from rolls in Georgia, in violation of federal law.

[veggiequeenmo]

i haven't heard much about acron lately...i wonder why?

[emilyringstrom]

Wonderful to read, Mr Holbrooke! Thank you.

[EvilCartman]

Obama vs McCain is just Coke vs Pepsi. I'm so tired of The Cola Wars every four years. Each time we "vote" the American people loose to puppets controlled by the big $$$. There will be no change. Keep drinking the Kool-Aid if you think anything will change.

[wmfor]

You are amazingly undiscerning. Coke vs. Pepsi? I doubt you could tell Coke from a 1982 Chateau Lafite Rothschild, if that is how you view the candidates.

[wanttruth]

Great column!

[ponderingmuch]

Why do people say McCain was a brave hero in Vietnam? He was a victim and he behaved as most victims would, meaning he gave them what they wanted ultimately. He deserves the sorts of benefits (mental health support, at least, since he doesn't need financial help, having married well) he votes against giving other veterans.

Aside from that, great article.

[wmfor]

He freely admits in his book that he crashed 5 planes (at what cost to the taxpayers?), because he wasn't really paying attention while flying. And we want him to pilot the Ship of State? With Gidget as his first mate?

[jagrmeister721]

Holbrooke had me until this:
>Finally, in a year when the Democrats are certain to increase their majority in both Houses, an Obama victory would offer the Democrats control of both the legislative and executive branches for the first time since 1994, and with it the possibility of legislative achievement after years of stalemate.

This scares the living bejeesus out of me.

[cyndeewi]

Why would a democratic congress scare you? Atleast something would get done. In addition, you know who to blame if it does not get done. Give me a break!

[wmfor]

Six years of a Republican Congress in abeissance to a cocky frat boy wasn't scary?

[Frannyvida]

And it's actually been 8 years. The last 2 were like driving with your hands tied due to the power of the Veto and the fillibuster. Have another drink jagrmeister, seems like you've been looking at the world through cloudy eyes for awhile now.