A Good Start

By Peter Hakim
La Nacion July 19, 2009

Una versión de este articulo en español está disponible aquí.

During his first six months in office, President Obama—who brought limited international experience to the White House—has done an admirable job of clarifying the directions he wants to take US foreign policy and setting out the guiding framework for his management of world affairs. He has made clear that he wants more open, less unilateral decision-making that involves a great deal of consultation with other governments. Rather than assuming and asserting US leadership, he seeks to align US policies and actions with those of other countries and to make use of the world’s multilateral institution. He is also emphasizing dialogue and discussion in dealing with US adversaries, and trying to diminish reliance on punitive sanctions.

Principles are important for President Obama, but his approaches to foreign affairs are also guided by a pragmatism that focuses on solving concrete problems, not in shaping new theories of world order. That pragmatism includes careful attention to the domestic politics of international policy decisions—and extreme caution in the face of political opposition and risk. And so far, his administration has demonstrated a high degree of self confidence and sure-footedness in defining and pursuing its international goals.

Progress toward those goals is still very modest, however. Obama has introduced only minor changes to the bulk of the Bush Administration’s policies. Three critical obstacles stand in the way of his global agenda.

First, US resources are stretched thin. The country now confronts its worst economic crisis since the 1930s, its debts and deficits are reaching record levels, and the country is fighting two wars. While the US is still the world’s financial leader—its ability to address global issues—environmental protection and climate change, poverty and social injustice, terrorism and criminal violence, for instance—is more economically constricted than at any time since WWII.

Second, domestic politics will continue to shape and constrain Washington’s responses to international challenges, mostly in the same ways they influenced past administrations. The closing of Guantanamo prison, although welcomed worldwide, may be delayed by US opposition to bringing detainees to the US. The political roadblocks to comprehensive immigration reform have not changed since Obama took office.  The opposition of trade unions and environmental groups continues to frustrate the adoption of sensible trade policies. Strong congressional support for Israel may weaken the White House efforts to adopt a more neutral stance in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Although there is no longer a “Miami veto” on changes in US Cuba policy, the Cuban-American community will continue to wield significant influence on the issues.

Third, many of the most pressing international issues may be immovable. Some have resisted solution for decades. Obama’s speech in Cairo last month promised a new start in Middle Eastern affairs, but it will not lead to any certain resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli standoff or any of the region’s other problems. The US may now be pursuing a more intelligent strategy in Afghanistan, but no one expects short term success. Obama has inched toward dialogue with the Iranian leadership, but the country is still moving steadfastly toward developing a capacity to build nuclear weapons. Relations with China and Russia will take years to change. Obama’s has raised great expectations in Africa, but an enormous commitment of resources is needed to make a difference on that continent.

In Latin America, where Obama is widely popular, the US has demonstrated a willingness to align its policy approaches more closely with the countries of the region. Recently, it shifted long standing policy toward Cuba and joined hemisphere-wide consensus to clear a path for the island nation’s return to the Organization of American States. Washington is also part of hemispheric consensus on the current crisis in Honduras. It has as well shown a readiness to more systematically engage Venezuela and other adversaries in the region. But most Latin America countries still remain ambivalent about the role the United States should play in hemispheric affairs—and many would prefer a diminished US profile and influence.

In its first six months, the Obama Administration has managed to map out a changed course for US foreign policy, take some initial steps along that course, and regain some measure of US prestige and credibility that were lost in the previous eight years. Not a bad start. The critical test is still to come, however—whether his policies, in fact, contribute to real, substantive progress in dealing with gobal and hemispheric problems.