Obama's Edge: Identity, Not Experience, is Most Important Foreign Policy Asset
To be clear at the outset, I'm not a partisan of either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton and think both would take the country in the right direction. But this whole debate over "foreign policy experience" seems misplaced. If we chose a president on that basis, clearly Joe Biden or Bill Richardson should be the nominee.
But policy competence is not the issue. The main issue in American foreign policy now is repairing America's image in the world. There would be no greater asset in that task than a leader like Obama, who by his very multicultural hybrid biography, renews the fundamental promise of America to the world as a society where every individual is considered worthy enough to get a chance in life. That speaks volumes, far more than a full set of Foreign Affairs magazines on his bookshelf.
In the times ahead, we don't need so much a seasoned diplomat of the already past post-Cold War moment as someone with an intuitive grasp of global politics in a world of hybrid cultures. Dashing a clash of civilizations and making globalization work are the tasks at hand, not negotiating this or that treaty in Geneva.
To "lead by example," as Obama has argued -- instead of the Bush will to power policies -- is the fundamental shift that needs to take place in our foreign policy.
There are plenty of foreign policy experts he can bring along into his team if he wins, including Joe Biden or Bill Richardson. If Hillary doesn't win I'm sure Madeleine Albright and Richard Holbrooke and, for that matter, Bill Clinton and even Joe Wilson would magnanimously lend their patriotic hands to refurbishing America's role in the world.
Finally, a small footnote about Bill Clinton's remark that choosing Obama is "a roll of the dice." That is certainly what I thought of Bill Clinton when I first met the future president, then governor of Arkansas, at a small dinner at Stanley Sheinbaum's home in Los Angeles in honor of Flora Lewis, the legendary foreign affairs columnist for the New York Times. Hillary was also there. Both of the Clinton's sparkled with intelligence and energy, and most important, a sense that the time for change was right and they were the right people to lead it.
But, seemingly intimidated by Flora's vast foreign policy experience, I recall that both Clinton's talked mostly about education, only listening intently on foreign policy subjects. In fact, Bill Clinton was so quiet that someone said afterwards, "Boy, Hillary is really smart. Was that other guy
her bodyguard?"
Could this governor from a marginal state who undoubtedly intuited what the American public wanted at that moment really competently replace George H. W. Bush, the man who was ending the Cold War with a whimper instead of a bang, who ran the CIA and was the envoy to China, not to speak of Vice-President?
Well, it turned out that Clinton's expansive, embracing American nature won the hearts and minds of much of the world as it was leaving the Cold War behind and entering the age of globalization. Once he got a handle on it, Clinton understood that American leadership was about making the world safe for interdependence. He was the right guy at the right time.
The question now about Obama is if he is the right guy at the right time now. The issue is not his diplomatic experience, but whether he is the best person to command America's global battle for hearts and minds.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Remember the Word Gravitas in the 2000 election?? and George Bush had no Gravitas..
Divide George Bush's Year 2000 Gravitas by ten.. and you would have the total of OBAMA's Gravitas.
And OBAMA's Muslim Background when he was a kid and his IDENTITY as a Half Black Man.. make him a great Foreign Policy Expert??
Why don't you liberals admit.. the GUY is a true lightweigh
You Liberals prove daily that you don't deserve to have the power of the Presidency
.
Now - that would be called a spin - experience is as experience does.
.
Intuition is for palm readers !
When America wakes up and realizes that nobody gives a shit about the US Foreign Policy, then you will understand that the issue must always be: What is best for Americans must dictate our voting conscience.
Nobody elected the US as saviours of the world. It is self-appointed status that has led to the demise of America's status in the world.
The daunting task that faces the next President is to overturn domestic policy to invigorate the economy, safeguard our human rights and health and to lead us into a world of happiness for us all.
Europe, India, China, South America and even Africa are all growing while America rots in its own false sense of Supremacy. Long live the Bush Legacy. I wish there was a DOME over America, so the smell would not spread.
The reason that good leaders make the right decisions is because they possess intellect and reason behind their intuition. You never have 100% of the information about a problem, and you generally have to act when you might only have less than 50% of the information about a problem. The reason Bush makes bad decisions is simple...e
Of the frontrunners right now, Obama made the right decision with the information on hand. The same cannot be said for Hillary Clinton, nor John Edwards (no matter how many times he apologizes for it). That is the quality of a leader.
On "rolling the dice": If you want to really make an impact, you've got to take a risk. You can elect some insider that might make a little incremental change, but if that won't be enough, then you're in the same situation you started off in and probably worse (because you've let things slide even further). If you want to make a significant change, if you need to turn something big around, you've got to take a risk and get someone in there who isn't afraid to do what he/she needs to do.
Playing not to lose doesn't excite voters or motivate them to turn out. That is the Clinton game right now...play
Mr. Obama has missed too many critical votes in Illinois and as a US Senator - when he misses a vote he disses Hillary on a vote he then disagrees with...
So as long as America's standing in the world, thank you GWB, is below par we should always elect a multicultural person?
"But policy competence is not the issue."
Oh. I see. Brilliant. Who needs competence when incompetence has served us so well these last seven years?
Instead of that old dumb "competence" - let's follow Nathan Gardels' superb advice and vote for a "multicultural hybrid biography.
According to Nate, electing Obama would renew "the fundamental promise of America to the world as a society where every individual is considered worthy enough to get a chance in life."
Yeah. If we elected someone with Obama's racial credentials it would show how great America is.
I mean...it wouldn't be as if we had elected a woman!
Mike Gravel is the best candidate. The man would make an outstanding President. He has integrity and tells the truth. What a concept! A true progressive is what this country desperately needs.
I think it comes down to the comparative levels of art vs. calculation that Obama and Hillary each bring to the table.
For me the difference is, Obama seems to show more emotional intelligen
Ultimately, their ability to process information from their advisors against their experience, different as it may be, and listen even when they aren't hearing what they want to hear is more critical than some elusive standard of experience that can be manipulated during a campaign. Ultimately, IQ will prevail for both of them, and any of the democratic candidates, actually, with their varying levels of art and calculation.
When Obama said he would meet with all the players in the Mideast he began to get my vote. This inclusive quality he has, his progressive record and his brilliance have led me to give to his campaign and to do what I can to get him nominated. Let's all begin the work needed to direct our people back to the humane principles we once had. We must have a president who has the respect of the peoples of the world.
It all comes back to the stupid cars. Or,
more accurately, the stupid ENGINES. Take
your standard v-8 engine. Careful, they're
heavy. No, that's good right there, set it
down, now let's take it apart. Ok, manifold
there, plugs there, valves and head over there,
those big holes are the cylinders, and those
metal things in the holes are the pistons.
Ok, now put it back together, and look at
what goes IN the engine, oil, water, fuel.
Then, you turn the key, and it starts and
runs, hopefully. We've been doing things THAT way for a long, long time. This is literally
the machine which drives our economy, the
device without which most of what goes on
in our world would not be possible. All
because of that Otto guy. He sure was smart.
Enter Soichiro Honda, mild-mannered bicycle
builder. He becomes a mechanic, opens his
own garage, starts making engines, and then
motorcycles, has his own company, goes
international.
http://en.
Well, long story short,Soichiro has passed
away, but Honda now builds cars, bikes,
AIRPLANES, robots, and god only knows what
else. Why care about this? Because science
equals progress, progress equals money, and
money equals power. Science, MOST powerful.
http://www
America's image, you say? We're getting ROLLED.
Played for stupid. Misled, misinformed(not
by accident, that), and a generation not
very well instructed. Oh, and we're broke.
http://www
We used to be #1, but China's coming fast. So fast, Japan's probably more than a little concerned.
http://eng
http://eng
The 21st century promises to be interestin
I will never vote for any candidate who voted for the Iraq war. If they didn't have the sense to see what that would lead to, and the immorality of the act, then they have no concept of diplomacy or fair and equitable treatment of all countries.
"If we chose a president on that basis, clearly Joe Biden or Bill Richardson should be the nominee." Right you are, Mr. Gardels. Or at least, close.
Actually, it should be Biden or Dodd, and I'm at a loss to explain Joe Biden's failure to break into double figures. Where are the Democratic party's leaders (and donors, or is that redundant?) when we need them?
I like John Edwards, too, but fear the many months of listening to haircut talk and watching the "primping" tape on TV.
Do you think Barack would be able to successfully operate an ethanol still? Wouldn't
that be a trip...kin
but with an eco-twist, the presidential
candidates have an ethanol cookoff, where they
have to construct(with help, don't expect a
miracle, here) an ethanol still, and develop
a batch of 180+proof 'shine and then drive
500 miles on it...TV worth watching!
Since Obama's real foreign policy experience is essentially nonexistent, his position papers are to be laid at the feet of his advisory group. From that group I find no creative spark, nothing that would bring about the approaches and attitudes necessary to turn us in the right direction or lend us hope.
His approach immediately brings to mind the hopes of a Miss America finalist - well-intentioned wishes without any comprehension of the problems, much less the solutions. He is supposed to translate the expert opinions of people who would better serve this country flipping burgers. The translation is supposed to be HOPE, served with a side of charisma.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
