Obama’s plan for change won’t come easy
Barack Obama’s platform of hope and change has catapulted him to the most powerful public office in the world.
Now that the celebration has subsided and the historic result is sinking in, it’s only logical to ask what change, if any, Obama can bring. From a foreign policy perspective, one can already see how the result has invigorated the so-called “rogue” regimes.
Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad reportedly sent a letter to the president-elect, congratulating his victory, praising the American people and raising the expectation of significant change in America’s foreign policy.
Syria, involved in peace talks with Israel, is employing a wait-and-see approach to gauge whether Obama could serve as a more effective mediator than previous American administrations.
It’s funny how a candidate who seems to have an aura of sincerity about him, who seems devoid of imperial hubris that plagued previous administrations – and one who is willing to have direct talks – has his counterparts engaged even before he’s sworn in.
The Bush strategy of isolating and labeling those that did not conform to American interests simply did not work. It was a diplomatic faux pas that only served to engender hostility, hatred, and further isolationism.
If Obama stands true on his foreign policy promises, there is the potential that he can mend some bridges and improve relations with historically hostile regimes. However, one person can only do so much.
Obama’s appointment of Rahm Emanuel, a member of the House of Representatives, as White House chief of staff sent mixed messages and contradicts any talk of change in regards to the hot-button Israeli-Palestinian issue.
Journalist Alexander Cockburn describes the former Bill Clinton policy aide as “a super-Likudnik Hawk, whose father was in the fascist Irgun in the late Forties, responsible for cold-blooded massacres of Palestinians.”
Irgun was the Zionist militia of former Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin, in the 1940s and carried out numerous terrorist attacks on Palestinian civilians including the bombing of Jerusalem’s King David Hotel in 1946.
The online Jerusalem Post reports that Emanuel’s father, Dr. Benjamin Emanuel, said he was convinced that his son’s appointment would be good for Israel. “Obviously he will influence the president to be pro-Israel,” he was quoted as saying. “Why wouldn’t he be? What is he, an Arab? He’s not going to clean the floors of the White House.”
In June 2003, Emanuel signed a letter criticizing Bush for being insufficiently supportive of Israel when Bush questioned an Israeli strike on Hamas that killed 18 people.
In July 2006, Emanuel was one of several members who fought for the cancellation of a speech to Congress by visiting Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki because al-Maliki had criticized Israel’s bombing of Lebanon.
It is difficult to envision any progress towards peace when a key member of the future administration seems to have such partisan views on the subject.
Other influencing factors include the various special-interest groups, powerful lobbies and corporate interests that now expect favours after filling Obama’s campaign coffers, and the military-industrial-complex that’s turned America into a contemporary imperialist state.
Barack Hussein Obama will be scrutinized and his loyalties will be continually tested.
In his memoir, The Audacity of Hope, Obama states that his father left Islam and was a confirmed atheist, but Obama still had to battle the Muslim stigma throughout the campaign and will have to do so throughout his presidential tenure.
With that chip on his shoulder, Obama may have to overcompensate and prove his loyalty to the American people – perhaps by waging more wars in places Americans can’t pinpoint on a map.
His ludicrous rhetoric to extend the Afghan war into Pakistan is already common knowledge. Whether it’s pro-war banter to appeal to rightwingers or a sincere change in strategy remains to be seen.
In the end, change is possible and Obama would be the man to bring that change in American foreign policy.
Still, I’m not going to hold my breath.
