A popular Washington, DC joke: What has Barack Obama accomplished his first year in office?
Answer: He won the Nobel Peace Prize.
It's not really very funny or fair to Obama, or to the Nobel committee who picked him as this year's winner. I think that the Norwegians chose to give the award to the American people as much as to the new American President. They were thanking Americans for having the good sense and courage to elect an untested young politician of mixed racial heritage to lead the world's superpower. It was, of course, also a rejection of George Bush and his ill fated attempt to turn the War on Terror in to a new Cold War.
How has Obama repaid the faith of the American voters who elected him -- and is he set on a path that might produce deeds to match the aspirations of the Nobel committee?
These are the kinds of questions that I posed to my seminar on American Grand Strategy at Occidental College where Barack Obama studied his first two years. My students began by examining the Obama foreign policy team -- profiling in class his appointees to the National Security Council, the State Department, the Pentagon, the CIA and even the Treasury and Commerce. They also looked at the terrain on which foreign policy decision making takes place, including the role of Congress and the influence of the media.
My Oxy students concluded that Obama had selected a competent and professional team, most of whom had served in the Clinton administration. The students also found, somewhat to their surprise, that the team is also very centrist -- and in most cases, led by cautious and conventional actors. There seem to be few if any "out of the box" or Big Picture thinkers on the team. It is a highly centralized operation with decisions located almost exclusively in the White House. The students understand that Barack Obama is The Decider -- the ultimate arbiter of US foreign policy as well as Commander In Chief.
The students looked at Obama's "cool" decision making style. He is known as No Drama Obama. He values team work, and lengthy, almost academic-like deliberations. Sometimes the decision making process can take weeks or months. It was on display during his deliberative approach to deciding on troop strength and a strategy for the war in Afghanistan. Some critics called it "dithering", and others viewed it as Obama in his "Mr Spock mode". Whatever; it is a hall mark of his approach to exercising presidential power.
As for a new American grand strategy, the students did not find one that explains or describes Obama's approach to the world. They recognized a theme--engagement--or in some cases such as Russia, re-engagement or "restart". A central message of the Obama campaign was that he would engage with the world, not try to dominate it with military might--and talk with leaders of all nations, even those who might be be hostile to US interests. Obama was attacked by Hillary Clinton and by John McCain for his supposedly naive approach to international relations--and he is criticized today for supposedly apologizing too much for America's past misdeeds.
There is no doubt that President Obama and his team have reengaged with the world -- and the world seems to appreciate it, if one can judge by recent global opinion polls. He has sent special envoys to trouble spots around the globe to look, listen and engage. He and Secretary of State Clinton have set records for foreign travel -- holding meetings with world leaders and also speaking directly to the world's populace through televised speeches and active public diplomacy, utilizing every means from town hall meetings to talk shows to Twitter and Facebook. It is this energetic outreach that the Nobel committee cited in announcing the award.
What has the President actually accomplished in his first year?
My students looked for concrete answers in a number of areas, and offer their findings in the newly released report -- "Obama's First Year -- The Occidental Report". On such topics as Iran, Afghanistan/Pakistan, Russia and China, the students looked first at what candidate Obama had said in 2008, and then examined what he has said as President. They follow with a description and analysis of what he has done to accomplish his stated policy goals, and how consistent he has been with his public statements. In conclusion, they provide analysis of the unresolved challenges that Obama faces in the year ahead.
It is a solid piece of work -- one that has educational value for concerned citizens at home and abroad. We have posted the report online at the Oxy student-run website, where it is available free to the global community. Copies have also been sent to members of the President's foreign policy team along with an open invitation for him to return to the Oxy campus and discuss foreign policy with the students.
Oxy students, as do most Americans, realize that the American President is, in many ways, de facto President of the World -- but that he is also a politician who is responsible to Americans for his actions. This is a point that Obama made in his Nobel speech when explaining why pursuing the military option in Afghanistan is just and necessary. He is not elected by the world, yet as the American President he provides leadership for it. While American presidents often make history, they do not do so in circumstances of their own choosing. President Obama inherited two wars and other difficult issues like a global recession from his predecessor. It is unrealistic to expect that he would bring world peace and prosperity in his first year in office.
One of the obvious obstacles to viewing Obama as a peacemaker is that he is also a war president -- again, a duality that he addressed himself in his speech in Oslo. Of course, an American President can carry a big stick in foreign affairs and use it (as Teddy Roosevelt did in Cuba and the Philippines) and still win the Nobel Peace Prize (as TR did for negotiating an end to the Russo-Japanese War). Obama inherited two war zones from Bush, but with his recent decision to add 30,000 troops to the Afghan theater, he cannot avoid having it labeled, fairly or not, as Obama's War.
In the last class of the term, we discussed Obama's decision and his West Point speech announcing his "surge then exit" strategy (although the exit part was quickly toned down by his foreign policy team when they appeared on the Sunday talk shows). The students were not surprised. After all, they had read what he had actually said during the campaign about Afghanistan being the right war. After appointing the hard charging General McChrystal and giving a speech calling it a "war of necessity", it was all but impossible politically for Obama to deescalate, at least in the short run. He had created a political box for himself and was not about to step out of it.
While Obama has committed additional young men and women and billions of dollars to the conflict in Afghanistan -- a commitment that will likely outlast his Presidency -- he has reduced the universality of the conflict. It is no longer a Cosmic War between good and evil without end. Obama has left himself room to deal with other foreign policy challenges on their merits without conflating them with a global crusade. He has made progress on arms control with Russia and on climate change with China -- no small matters.
As Year One ends for Obama and the world, my students' report stands, I believe, as a fair assessment of his global leadership. It may be that this is the end of the beginning, and that more innovative and far thinking policies are ahead that would deserve a Nobel prize -- or it is possible that we are in for more of the same: engagement but conventional thinking on foreign affairs.
