An Open Letter To The Next President Of The United States

In just fifty days you will be, in theory, the most powerful man in the world.

I say "in theory" because your first challenge will in fact be your country's decline in power. It's been so long that we have been hearing about this decline -- and now it has finally happened. Asia's rise in strength, the awakening of India and especially of China have indeed created a New Deal, this time for the planet. So, what is your response to that? What is the reaction of a new America to this new world order? The ground that was lost in the factories of Ohio and Michigan will never be recovered. But an ambitious America is still capable of accomplishing three things, which in tomorrow's world will be just as valuable, if not more so. First, make sure that the patents the new capitalists in Asia are working on -- continue to be "made in the USA." Second, make sure that people in Asia and elsewhere continue to think that Yale and Princeton offer the best possible education for the movers and shakers of the world. And third, ensure that American banks continue to offer the most sophisticated and secure financial services to those in possession of the world's accrued profits. As long as America retains full control of these three sectors, it will continue to hold the keys to real power. As long as the world continues to rely on America in the areas of scientific innovation, training the elite and allocating its assets, the important elements will be safe. This from now on will be your task. And your very first priority. Either the United States under your administration sets in place a true research policy, helping its universities retain their lead and reforming in depth its stricken financial system. Or it doesn't do anything, lets the market play itself out, and delays the implementation of the intellectual, moral and technical reforms its banking system needs - and it will be replaced by others. In a word, Mr. Future President, it will be by using the intangible and in the wider sense culture that you must begin.

The second challenge you will be confronting will be in international relations - dealing with Russia's ambitions as they were just revealed during the crisis in Georgia. There again, your predecessor did not fully understand what is at stake. He did not heed the clear warning he received from Vladimir Putin in April of 2005, when, in an address to the Russian Federal Assembly, Putin declared that the collapse of the Soviet empire had been "the greatest catastrophe of the 20th century." The greatest, really? Greater than the two World Wars? Than Auschwitz? Than Hiroshima? Than the genocides of Cambodia, of Rwanda, of Darfur? Yes, that's right. He actually said that. And it will be up to you, once you are elected, to evaluate the consequences. Because a man who can say this will not stop there. A man who thinks, in his heart and soul, that the emancipation of the former Russian colonies is a cataclysm greater than that of Auschwitz cannot, if he is logical, NOT do all that is required to repair the damages of that cataclysm. For example, in Georgia. But also in Moldavia. In the Ukraine. Perhaps one day in the Baltic countries. And this without mentioning Europe's dependence on Kazakhstan or Azerbaidjan for the security of its energy supply - having observed the flaccidness of our reaction to the coup in Tbilisi, the two countries will choose their camp themselves and will go off on their own, before being forced to do so under the protection of the post-Soviet mafiosos. A new Cold War, in other words. The new face of a partner we must learn to treat also as an adversary. We are going to need new codes, new signals and a new language of pressures and sanctions. For example, the outgoing President apparently thought that making vague military gestures off the coast of Sotchi would scare off the oligarchs of the Kremlin. The new President will have to understand that in the new order of things, the only language these people understand is the language of commercial intimidation, of economic blackmail, or pressure using the mechanisms of the market.

Going beyond the situation in Russia, the battle to promote democratic values and actions in the world will be another key issue during your term. It isn't that your predecessor didn't also fight this battle. He just didn't do it very well. He seized upon the fine theme of the exceptionalism of a nation which had received a mandate encouraging the people to get rid of its tyrants, as it once had done - but only to offer, notably in Iraq, a caricatural and inept version of that theme. Your task will be to take up this theme again, to set it straight, to return to it its sense, its honor - your responsibility will be, in correcting Bush's errors, to NOT be tempted to take the other, symmetrical path, that of isolationism, which has too often been the dominant inclination of American politics. How, then? What is the difference between the "neocon" approach to exceptionalism and yours? Ultimately, it is rather simple. The neocon thinks that democracy can be decreed; you will explain that it must be constructed. The neocon thought it was enough to say, "let there be -- democratic -- light" for that light to shine; you will answer that democracy is a matter of time, will and patience. Deep down, the neocon never broke with the messianic prejudice which the pioneers of the movement had themselves inherited from their far Left pasts (the rather lazy belief that History would produce on its own, without effort or the intervention of men, initially a classless society, now a democracy); you will retain the objective while also addressing the question of the means to achieve that objective, which are political, frankly and clearly political (your future Secretary of State will be dealing with a certain Bernard Kouchner in France, who happens to be one of the world's best experts in democratic nation building - in fact I recommend that you contact him as soon as possible ...).

Let's look at the question from the other end. What was, at bottom, the source of the neocons' illusion? Politics. Under their reign the very concern for politics has fallen into disrepute. The fact, to be precise, that a man who doesn't believe in something at home cannot believe in it abroad either. Or to be even more precise, the fact that by repeating that if on its own United States territory the State has nothing to say about social inequities, great poverty or public health problems, one may also logically think that it has nothing to say about building armies, an administration or schools in Iraq. Let us suppose for an instant that you listen to my recommendation, that you take seriously the causal chain of events I am describing. You will choose the same path, but in reverse. You will draw the same conclusions, but in the opposite direction. Instead of thinking, "because I do not want a health policy in the inner cities of Buffalo or Los Angeles, I am taking an expeditionary force to Baghdad without having any idea of what I will be doing there the next day," you will say, "because I no longer want to send troops anywhere without having a clear image of the nation we intend to build there, I am beginning to understand that my role is also, in Buffalo, to protect the poor, or in New Orleans, to repair the levees without waiting for the next hurricane." In so doing you will break with a diminution of "government" which began well before the Bush years. You will slide, imperceptibly but inexorably, from a sort of adjusted Wilsonism toward a revisited Rooseveltism. Be you Democrat or Republican, you will be a political President, reconnecting -- another of my recommendations -- with those Founding Fathers who without renouncing the sacrosanct principle of individual freedom nonetheless posited that the role of those who govern is also to help, protect, and rescue those they rule.

Finally you will have to define a position on the Muslim world which has, since September 11, become the locus of all the quandaries. I will overlook the often liberticide nature of the "war on terror," Guantanamo, torture and certain clauses of the Patriot Act which you should abolish as soon as you take office. I will also overlook the colossal strategic error -- also to be corrected as soon as you step on the world stage -- of choosing to ally with a Pakistan which pretended to be the best student in the anti-terrorist class, while at the same time providing the murderers with their most solid sanctuaries. When it comes down to it there are two possible attitudes, and only two. There is the negative, warrior attitude more or less inspired by the bad prophets of the clash of civilizations between the West in its entirety and a world of Islam also perceived as a single block: impasse and disaster. Then there is another attitude which begins with the principle that the only true clash, the only serious confrontation that counts, is the one dividing Islam with itself, opposing, in Islam, the partisans of fanaticism and the apostles of Islamic enlightenment: no one has really tried it. Why not you? No one doubts that we will have to fight the first group, and do it without excuses or attenuating circumstances. But you will also need to speak to the second group, to tell them and show them that they are not as alone as they think they are. We must help them, finance them, salute them and give them the courage to prevail, to fight. That is what we did in the 70s and 80s with the dissidents of Sovietism. Why not do the same thing with these women, these free thinkers, these persecuted intellectuals, who are to totalitarian Islam what those dissidents were to Red fascism? Why not create for these new heroes of democracy the same kinds of support networks which once formed around the friends of Alexandr Solzhenitsyn and Andrei Sakharov?

Anti-Americanism, Mr. Future President, has become a new planetary religion. And unfortunately it will take more than four or even eight years to get rid of this kind of religion. But if you did try, if you agree, on these sensitive matters, to speak with the language of truth and courage, you would right away give your country a face that would already no longer be quite the same. That too is exceptionalism. And that too is what the world expects from that "shining city upon the hill."

Translated from the French by Sara Sugihara

Comments

[realpolitic]

The best students from around the world who went to Princeton and Yale to study engineering or science always used to stay in America. Now they are returning home. Also, the Bush administration treats science with disdain. For so long Bush denied basic climate change science and conservatives want ot teach the biblical creation story in science class alongside natural selection theory. The fundamentalists are dumbing us down to such a degree we can no longer even discuss the issues intelligently.

[Ruraljuror]

There is a fundemental contradiction between the neocon practice of achieving goals through brute force and underhanded tactics--and the practice of democracy. Democracy requires that powerful individuals refrain from imposing their will, and grant equal voice to partners/ colleagues/ co-nationals.
Within our country, neocons have tried to dismantle opposition to powerful economic forces (mainly oil) and to their political will by dismantling our system of checks and balances. Internationally we have ignored the voice of other countries and have acted unilaterally, which practice is approvingly referred to as "exceptionalism." In Iraq, we toppled a despotic (but functioning) Iraqi government BY VIOLENT MEANS, the least democratic of methods, and then the neo-cons expected that a democratic government, one where the powerful would all willingly sit on their hands and listen to the opinions of their fellow citizens, would arise AUTOMATICALLY. This was extreme magical thinking.
The first job of the next president is to return to democratic practices domestically and abroad . We must end our occupation of Iraq by including the states in the region in the rebuilding project. By helping neutralize power plays between Sunnis, Shia, Kurds and various sub-groups, neighbors in the region might create enough of a balance that some seeds of democracy could begin to grow in Iraq.
Only one of the candidates for president has a clear enough understanding of the nature of democracy (which is not the same as free markets) to enable us to move in this direction.

[deliriousgod]

how will america 'train the elite' with anti-intel­lectualism the drumbeat in the Heartland?

[Gronamox]

Putin has sold Russia to the criminal class. His is not a market system. It is an imported economy. Mr. Putin is KGB and will always be such. He is a believer in Marxian economics and Stalinist tactics. He is a fool. Russia will never be able to reclaim the countries it once controlled. It is too late. If Putin tries to recapture the Motherland a la Adolph and the Fatherland, he will be destroyed. He is surrounded. Georgia doesn't matter. The Russian Army retreated-there was no one to fight. The lumbering invasion was a disgrace. Ukraine, Poland, Hungary, Romania, East Germany matter. One false step and the world will unleash its fury not only on the Middle East, but on the Russian steppes. Unfortunately, McCain may be elected. He will be the instigator of the next world conflict. It will not destroy the West-but it will destroy the middle east and russia. The French know more about the world than we could ever know. They are not a warrior nation. They are the world's historians and philosophers. The French have never understood war. They do understand politics.

[AlexChaihorsky]

Amazing. US Government is buying out Freddie and Fannie and looks at buying Lehman and AIG and this guy talks about Russia not being a market system! Putin stopped criminals that dominated Russian streets during Eltsyn times and this guy said Putin sold Russia to criminal class.
The guy brought Russian economy back, paid all the foreign debt, made Russia one of the three biggest US debt financiers and he is a fool??!!

Please, read what NATO summit admits now - that Georgia started the conflict!
French are "warrior nation"?? Does the word "Maginot Line" rings the bell? Or Algeria?
France is a very independent and very educated country, but a warrior nation is is not since Russian Army buried Napoleon's and occupied Paris.
Read about it.

[Gronamox]

Brilliant. The French are the thinkers of the world. Nobody does it better. Of course, if McCain is elected, we are doomed. He is incapable of leading this nation, let alone a squadron-without getting shot down and taken prisoner. Obama is truly of the Lincoln and Roosevelt mode. He understands all this and understood long before this article was written. He has called for bombing of Pakistan from the beginning of the Afghani war. The Neo-Cons are dead. Why? They failed. Their failure will haunt them when the bank loans come due. They should be made to pay for this war. Pearl, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, all of those bastards should pay, with their lives. As for Islam-let the Caliphate begin-I can just see these oil rich fat cats bowing to some Caliph. This is a dying religion. It will die as soon as oil bottoms out. We should never have fought them at all. Terror is one act on one day. It is not a plague. These fools are stuck in a mountain range that will be nuked back to the stone age.

[RonMar]

The U.S. remains the greatest power in the world. We have dealt with Russia's ambitions since the WWII era by maintaining a strong national defense and using it effectively in concert with other means of international relations. Altering course now would be in defiance of historical proof of success. "Bush's errors" led to joyous Iraqis voting in free elections, showing their purple digits, an Afghanistan with the Taliban/al-Qaeda on the run and in hiding, and no Islamic jihadists attacks on the U.S. anywhere, except against military and diplomatic volunteers, since 9/11 - a Clinton legacy. In this 35+ year world war brought by the jihadists in their current historical resurgence pursuing their 1400-year-old aim of taking over the world for Allah, Bush is the only one of 7 Presidents who has confronted Islamic jihadists effectively. Enabling the jihadists by changing what has so obviously worked well - Homeland Security and the Patriot Act would be simply foolish. Read Why I Am Not A Muslim by Ibn Warraq for a grasp on the history of "Islamic enlightment" and "free thinkers," especially chapters 6-11. Anti-Americanism has been a reality since the founding of the nation with the French in more recent years notorious for it. Your present leader of what is called Frankistan due to French weakness toward Muslims seems to be better than recent past French leaders. Thank you for your opinions, but knowledgeable, intelligent, thinking Americans are not likely to value them highly.

[K2isnothome]

I am knowledgeable, intelligent, and thinking. And American. And I reject you. And take your soggy, pathetic Freedom Fries with you!
Good day.

[idest]

""led to joyous Iraqis voting in free elections" - Except the Sunnis, of course. How'd that turn out? Didn't they have another provincial election coming in October? That still on track?

"an Afghanistan with the Taliban/al-Qaeda on the run and in hiding" - Have you just not watched the news for 4 years? The Taliban has retaken most of the southern parts of Afghanistan and Al Qaeda has been operating with almost no hindrance in Pakistan. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs himself says we are in danger of losing in Afghanistan.

"Bush...has confronted Islamic jihadists effectively" - How has his strategy been effective? Our invasion of Iraq only served as a massive recruitment tool for Al Qaeda, and our focus on Iraq has allowed Al Qaeda to reorganize in Pakistan and for the Taliban to reassert itself in Afghanistan. Not only that, but the only hand we've strengthened in the Middle East has been Iran's. How is that effective? Oh, and didn't Bush insist on the Palestinian elections that brought Hamas to power? Yeah, good idea.

"what has so obviously worked well - Homeland Security and the Patriot Act" - If this was the case, why are our chemical and nuclear plants still unsecured? Why have we made no progress in securing loose nuclear materials? What do trains carrying tanks full of poisonous gas still run through major cities with no security? Because Bush doesn't give a rat's behind about security if it cuts into corporate profits.

[Romeover]

Read "Malleus Maleficarum" by Heinrich Kramer and Jacob Sprenger, for a grasp on the history of "Christian Enlightenment" and the 2000 year old aim of jesushadists for taking over the world for their alleged "God".

Thank you for your opinion, RonMar, but your conclusions about knowledgeable, intelligent, thinking Americans show that you are not one of them.

[LunaNik]

"Christian Enlightenment" is an oxymoron. There is no reason in religion.

[SimonHelms]

What he is talking about Russia? I don't trust Putin at all, but "dealing with Russia's ambitions as they were just revealed during the crisis in Georgia" sounds like not beeing familiar with the circumstance that a testosterone bloated Saakashwili (= backed by NATO) thought he could tease the russian bear without taking a risk. Then he got his arse kicked and now what? Damning the Russians for what we'd done exactly the same way?
Why does Levy not mention global warming as one of the priorities?
How serious does he take the profound misery which took place with Guantanamo et.al. by saying "I will overlook the often liberticide nature of the "war on terror," Guantanamo, torture and certain clauses of the Patriot Act which you should abolish as soon as you take office." Sounds like talking about cookies.

Much light, more shadows.
www.algore2008.de/blog

[hiprogloho]

Mr. Levi, the greatest catastrophe of the 21st century is the buying and selling of America to elitist fascism, foreign nationalists and laisse fair immigration policy that is turning the US into a slave labor police state. Until a President does what's right for the American people rather than those beholden to the Gods of money and religion, the US is headed for further decline and social unrest. Yes, the great nation that saved the world from Hitler and Communism has fallen prey to the same evil it once fought. The next Chief Exec has to undo that evil or we will become an imperial Western Rome ripe for sacking.

[lechatnoir]

Bernard-Henri Lévy, aka BHL, France's answer to Thomas Friedman.

[FredBrighton]

This is excellent! I just hope the next President can read. The reign of Bush and Cheney speaks volumes on what happens when an autistic born-again illiterate and a psychotic fierce capitalist take charge of a seriously militarized nation. I have read the essays of the fascists before WW2 and it all sounds like the Republican's platform for '08. We should hire somebody to make sure the next President, if they let us have a new President, reads this essay and tries to understand it.

[Stanley]

These are solid ideas in a cast sea of noise. I hope they will be heard and digested with great care by our future leader. An "intelligent" plan for revitalization is neede for the city on the hill to shine once again. Having a aggressive Russia is an opportunity to reminf others of how we got here in the first place. Even our enemies like Iran prefer our intollerable but understood hegemony to the brutality of the Russian war machine.

[TheRationalLeft]

I am not sure what credibility the author of this post has, given his blind support for Georgia in the face of contrary facts. Writing for Alternet.org, Noam Chomsky points out his ridiculous proclamations:

"In Russia, the Wall Street Journal reports, "legislators, officials and local analysts have embraced the theory that the Bush administration encouraged Georgia, its ally, to start the war in order to precipitate an international crisis that would play up the national-security experience of Sen. John McCain, the Republican presidential candidate." In contrast, French author Bernard-Henri Levy, writing in the New Republic, proclaims that "no one can ignore the fact that President Saakashvili only decided to act when he no longer had a choice, and war had already come. In spite of this accumulation of facts that should have been blindingly obvious to all scrupulous, good-faith observers, many in the media rushed as one man toward the thesis of the Georgians as instigators, as irresponsible provocateurs of the war."

www.rationalleft.com

[harbinger53]

You're badly misinformed on the Russia/Georgia Issue. Russia was already in Ossetia, protecting it's citizens from the Georgian Army under UN approval. Georgia came in and began military action, destroying infrastructure and murdering the Ossetian people. The oil pipeline and oil reserves are desired by a country in the middle east that is an ally of Georgia.

Our standing in the world community will not improve until we stop looking the other way while certain middle eastern nations murder and slaughter innocent children and stealing their land. The same is true about the way we ignore the murder of people and theft of land in certain African countries.

We also must respect the sovereignty of every nation, not just the ones who have powerful lobbies in this country.

The US is complicit toward terrorist countries, mainly due to the power of their lobbies in Washington. Until this changes, we will have no rest from attacks, and no respect in the world.

[charleydan]

I wished before you wrote this you would have listened or read some of the powerful speakers before congress. I do not think you would have listed those three as top priorities.

First without a powerful government. We do not know how other countries might treat us. Who knows what reasoning they might use to invade us? for oil?

Will any other country defend us. Have the resources to do so as most of our allies are in the same boat.

This is priority uno one and repeated again and again. Stabilize the economy.

So first on agenda here is getting a strong economy back as soon as possible. Because a strong economy will give us resources for defense if needed. If not, savings which is always healthy.

It is as simple as your household. Cut expenditures and increase income. Both would require a lower life style for now to redeem the rewards later. Of course your not having to buy votes in your house. It is your money and you will do what it takes and sonny will get what is available or left over.

The government is buying votes. Unless, the Biggest Amerian Lobbyists(voters) say no more. Well, the expenditures will not get cut. That leaves Congress and Senate with only one option. Dr. till the patient dies.

Of course if McCain/Palin are dead serious about their reduction in government, reform/change. That will be the first to buck the biggest lobbyist in America and get elected.

[donaldw6]

I kept waiting for that rant to make sense, but it never happened.

[leopoldmozart]

How do you propose we "stabilize the economy"? By planting more farms? Sorry: we've made agriculture about as efficient an enterprise as possible and we aren't going to get more wealth there. Manufacture more trucks and toaster ovens? Sorry, that ship has sailed as well. There is virutally no way we can increase our technology and efficiency enough to get back the millions of manufacturing jobs lost to China and Latin America. We'll have to wait for their economies to grow and prosper before we'll be competitive there. So, what DO we offer the world that can bring us wealth and thus stabilize our economy? Technological innovation, education, and a financial market free of corruption and incompetence. To have these things we need enforcable laws governing patents, contracts, accreditation of schools and universities, securities commerce etc. etc. etc. Where is this rule of law going to come from? From having government stay out of everything? Oh please: grow up.

[LunaNik]

The only way to restore the economy to working order is to reinstate the middle class. We are the ones who spend money in this country. It has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the neocons' "trickle down theory" of economics is an abject failure. It's long past time for the wealthy to pay their fair share.

I suggest a return to the sharply progressive income tax tables of the late 50s and early 60s, where the top tax bracket was 90%. That would begin to redistribute the wealth from the hands of a mere 1% of the population back into the hands of those that spend it here at home: the middle class.

And to any company which has profited from the appalling lack of regulation and is now failing and demanding taxpayer bail-out: you can start by using your multimillion dollar golden parachutes and bonuses to save yourself.

Obama/Biden '08

[farrisjc]

You say that in theory, the next president will be the most powerful man in the world. Your theory is outlined well, and as Immanuel Kant says, "Everything true in theory must also be valid in practice." With that said, assuming your theory is sound, the next president will indeed be the most powerful man in the world, but some could argue that the points you outlined in your theory are unattainable ("an ambitious America is still capable of accomplishing three things...") If this is the case, you will need more theory if you want to see the reality of the president being the most powerful man in the world.