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.

Comments

[itsnotmyfault]

Nathan Gardels is editor-in-chief of NPQ, the journal of social and political thought, the Fantasy game playing dungeons and dragons division, with a decided concentration in science fiction, published by Blackwell/Oxford, and Global Services of the Los Angeles Times Syndicate/Tribune Media

This is one piece of irresponsible drivel. The President as a symbol, an empty vessel, trumping ...say...competence. Why indeed that is what we are now blessed with.

[shelleybear]

America: style over substance.
Well, at least you can see it.
Yeah Biden and Richardson are the two best candidates overall.

[BinBaldwin]

I agree. The only way to repair our image and make friends is to abandon Israel and Obama is the right person for repairing our image in the Mideast and Europe and perhaps even Russia. Yes this may entail closing our eyes to another holocaust but thats the price we may have to pay for popularity. Currently there are 1.2 Billion muslims and 300 Million Arabs. We can mend our relationship with 25% of the planet in ONE DAY by publicly breaking ties with Israel.

[CookieInPA]

Glad you like Obama's chance of and approach at repairing America's standing in the world, since he's lifted a good deal of his policy and his wording on policy from John Edwards. From his "leading by example" to building schools and educating those overseas, to verbatim quotes from Edwards' brilliant essay on foreign policy, Obama has been a follower, not a leader. I'll take the guy he's been following, thank you very much. That man is John Edwards, who will be a better, stronger leader than Obama.

[Purple Girl]

I'd rather 'roll the dice' than be subject to the 'expereince' that has plagued our Gov't for at least 3 years.
biden, Dodd, richardson... all have had plenty of time to steer this 'titanic' off it's fateful course. One we are feeling the full effects of currently.
Funny how they all have 20/20 hindsight, but were blind to foresight. Who couldn't see the inevitablity of an an attack on our soil,.. with planes. Highjackings & bombings starting in the '70's.
And what have they really been pissed about? the abuses orchestraed by the Weathly Oil Countries and their minion 'multi national Corps' that hide behind our flag.They attacked US because of them, not because of our
"Freedom". Can't even believe anyone bought that reason.
From Choas comes order.
So the isreali's remain the hated- stir up the fanatics, so the US can bring them down and the Saudi's can move inquickly to secure the oil, ultimately gaining control & resources from an area previusly unavailbale for domination by the Gobal Oil Barons.

So , if you have not stopped servicing these entities while you sat in a public office- then you never will. Thus the more power you command will also be granted to them-still.
This is why we are so focused on 'Two Bit' countries lately. they are no threat- they are just sitting on oil reserves.
tjose who possess nothing we want we ignore, or if a possible ral threat- we placate. We never invade for no booty. will we be 'freeing' The Venezualans next? How about all of South America?
so I ask again
Expereince? In what?

[candyc]

Since it's now clear that Al Gore won't jump in,
I've been on the fence in choosing between Obama and Edwards in our primary. I really like what Edwards says, and his passion. But yesterday I had a very interesting conversation with a very conservative, very wealthy older friend of mine. They are Democrats who have consistently voted Republican. She said that she and her 80 year old husband-both of whom voted for W TWICE are very interested in Obama and will vote for him in the primary. My 85 year old mother also contributed to his campaign.

My friend and her husband think that Obama is the man to lead the country into an uncertain future. They think that he will, by example,
lift up black americans and minorities, that he'll choose his cabinet wisely and end the war.

If these people will vote for Obama, everyone will vote for him.

I have NEVER believed that Hillary will get the nomination. I know only one person who is enthusiastic about her.
Why isn't the media listening? The voters DO NOT WANT a dynastic system. They do not like her.My women friends all abhor her.She's surrounded by the same old Washington insiders.
We're tired of her husband. Tired of her robot responses. Tired of her obvious manipulation. Tired of her talking points and REALLY tired of her bragging about her experience. As Frank Rich quoted yesterday, she has has physical proximity to power, not experience.

I'm sending money to Obama's campaign today.
We are ready for a brand new America. Barak is our best shot at saving this country.

I'm hoping he wins Iowa and NH. If the black
voters see that he is electable, they will abandon Hillary in droves.

Go Obama!

[TheKiddy]

Bill Clinton and by extension (her campaign would have us believe) Hillary Clinton parsed (is it genocide or something like it) while nearly a million people were slaughtered in Rwanda. Bill Clinton has said that his failure to intercede in Rwanda was the greatest regret (or among the greatest regrets) of his Presidency.

Which of the candidates would take action, and not parse? Which of the candidates would send in the troops and/or get the UN to act quickly and decisively?
I frankly do not see Obama as the person who would do this. What in his character or experience suggests that he could act swiftly and decisively in a comparable situation? On the domestic side, he criticizes other candidates for wanting to fight corporate interests in Washington, saying we need to invite everyone to the "big table". Would he have invited the Tutsi and Hutu to the big table? And which of the candidates, really in your heart of hearts, would you trust if you could go back in time, to go into Afghanistan and finish the job? I am not talking about Iraq, but about "intuitive" kinds of things like character as brought up in the article.

Which of the candidates will fight for what is right, and act strongly and decisively to right wrongs and has the skills to convince other countries to act with us? Actually, we have a few that could do it. But I am not convinced that Obama is one of them.

[Boyarina]

I think it will take generations to repair America's image in the world - if humanity has more generations before it.

[jmsc1965]

Finally, someone has articulated precisely what it is that makes Obama the man of the hour, the choice for a Democratic party (and ultimately the whole country) seeking to forge a new and productive direction for the 95 plus percent of the country that has been excluded by Bush and by the phoney clash of red and blue. I know this purports to be neutral commentary, but neutral or partisan, it says it just right.

[NoMoreDrama]

Get over it Hillary Lovers. She's bad for America. I don't think there's an Obama Supporter out there that's going to vote for him for just one reason or the other. The best sum of all the parts is that he's not Hillary and he is a very genuine person. Polls show Hillary can't even beat herself in an election, just look at her negatives. Empty pantsuit.

[UTARebel]

Indeed?

Is this what America is about?

Fight, if you must, about which 'woman' or which 'black' will receive the dem nomination, and then lose the battle.

Mayhaps, you have already lost. The Supreme Court is already stacked against you... for how many years?

Be thankful that you live in a great land such as ours.

[AMolinaro]

The fact that Mr. Obama comes from a hybrid cultural background can't be understated. All of our nation's presidents have come from the same small group of rich WASP families. All are white, almost all protestant, and the current one can't even pronounce the names of many foreign leaders.

Seeing as how our foreign policy is increasingly dealing with problems outside of the world of WASPs, having a president with a broad cultural background is an obvious asset.

[TommyMcCarthy]

Speaking of lightweights....Mr. Gardels makes at least TWO patently ridiculous assertions in this piece.....both are closely linked..

1:) "policy competence is not the issue"
Excuse me?? Not only is policy competence the issue....policy competence is the ONLY issue. Millions of formerly disengaged voters are paying close attention to this election... NOT because of ideology, race, gender, party affiliation, (clearly I could go on)
but BECAUSE......

2:)Apparently Mr. Gardels believes that what is needed is someone with "an intuitive grasp of global politics" Sorry, we the people have had all the intuition, gut feelings, surmises, ideologies strongly informed by core beliefs, things momma told me, even the Word Of God, etc. to last us a good long stretch......
BECAUSE....

BECAUSE....even the most oblivious among us cannot fail to notice that the policies extant for the last seven years have put the "ship of state" on the shoals....We'd like nothing more complicated than a GROWN UP to pilot the ship off the rocks,... repair the damage a bit, if possible,...even make a little headway, perhaps.... and THEN "maybe later" (as our parents told us) we can address the lofty but naive notions Mr. Gardels apparently thinks should inform policy both domestic and foriegn...............................tm

[SamThornton]

Foreign policy credentials are always bandied about in Presidential elections but, at least since the end of World War II, I haven't seen any foreign policy geniuses installed at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Arguably, the two Presidents with the best credentials going in were Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon, both of whom completely screwed up a little something called Vietnam, not to mention their own wholly owned series of bonehead moves.

Love 'em or hate 'em, the career diplomats at the State Department combine the expertise and judgment the nation needs. What we really need in the Oval Office is a good listener.

[ilikbshbtntgeo]

Biden and Richardson, while nice guys, are lightweights. Edwards knows how to win against fascists repubs because he's done it. Hell, he does it for a living. Obama is definitely the oprah-warm and fuzzy candidate but neither he nor hillary monster can win in november. Edwards can win.