Swan Song

164

February 1, 2014

Published in Die Tageszeitung
(Germany) on 29 January 2014
by Bernd Pickert (link to original link to original)

Translated from by Ron Argentati. Edited by Laurence Bouvard.

Barack Obama took an aggressive stance in his State of the Union address. He said he had abandoned hope that a divided Congress was capable of getting anything accomplished; instead, he announced he would henceforth govern by decree wherever possible.

But what sounds so combative is in reality a swan song for one of his biggest 2008 election promises: To change the political atmosphere in Washington and unite the nation. The opposite has happened — and even if that's not primarily Obama's fault, it still represents his failure. His State of the Union address bears witness to that fact.

At this point, no one can yet predict where Obama will wield that authority. He has spotlighted many areas in recent years but has not acted on them. Still, because Obama seems ready to try to advance his initiatives in the shadow of 2013, when virtually nothing was accomplished, he is applauded. But real reforms can only be accomplished with real legislation; otherwise, the next president can simply reverse them as quickly and as easily as Obama enacted them.

So Obama's combative announcement not only serves notice that he has given up on bipartisanship, but that he is also abandoning the hope of accomplishing anything over the next three years that will endure beyond 2016. One exception could be the long-overdue immigration reform. That will have to be enacted by bipartisan legislation; analysis of the last election has led most Republicans to the conclusion that they cannot afford to alienate even more Latino voters, which in turn provides opportunities for more congressional consensus.

The 12 million immigrants with no papers can only hope that Obama's confrontational course doesn't turn out to be counterproductive.

Ein Abgesang
Von Bernd Pickert
29.01.2014

Die Rede zur Lage der Nation zeigt: Obama kann sein Versprechen nicht halten, den Politikbetrieb in Washington zu verändern. Er ist gescheitert.

Barack Obama klingt offensiv, ist es aber nicht. Bild: ap
Kämpferisch gab sich US-Präsident Barack Obama in seiner Rede zur Lage der Nation. Er werde nicht mehr darauf hoffen, dass der gespaltene Kongress irgendetwas auf die Reihe bringe, erklärte Obama, sondern per Verordnung regieren, wo immer das möglich sei.

Aber was so offensiv klingt, ist in Wirklichkeit ein Abgesang auf eines der größten Versprechen, mit denen Obama in den Wahlkampf 2008 gezogen war: Er wollte den Politbetrieb in Washington verändern, die Nation einen. Das Gegenteil ist der Fall – und auch wenn das nicht zuerst an Obama liegt, bedeutet es doch sein Scheitern. Seine Rede gibt davon Zeugnis.

Noch weiß niemand, in welchen Bereichen Obama wirklich im Alleingang agieren wird. Angekündigt hat er in den letzten Jahren viel, passiert ist wenig. Allein: Schon dafür, dass der Präsident den Versuch zu unternehmen scheint, nach dem verlorenen Jahr 2013 in seinen verbleibenden drei Amtsjahren noch etwas zu reißen, bekommt er Applaus. Echte Reformen ließen aber nur per Gesetz erreichen, sonst kann sie der nächste Präsident genauso einfach wieder beseitigen, wie Obama sie eingeführt hat.

Und so ist Obamas kämpferische Ankündigung eine Absage nicht nur seines Vorhabens der überparteilichen Zusammenarbeit, sondern auch seines Glaubens, noch irgendetwas Bedeutendes zustande bringen zu können, was über 2016 hinauswirkt.
Eine Ausnahme könnte die überfällige Migrationsreform sein. Die geht nur per Gesetz, und nach ihren Analysen der letzten Wahlen wissen auch die meisten Republikaner, dass sie es sich mit den Latino-WählerInnen nicht noch mehr verscherzen dürfen. Das ergibt Möglichkeiten für Kongressmehrheiten. Den 12 Millionen Papierlosen ist zu wünschen, dass Obamas Konfrontationskurs hier nicht kontraproduktiv wirkt.

This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Tags:
Germany

Hot this week

Block title

Israel: Donald Trump’s Intervention in the Netanyahu Trial Is Unacceptable

February 17, 2026. Published in Israel Hayom

Trump is grotesquely intervening against Israeli democracy and the rule of law.

Cuba: Are Our Days Numbered?

February 14, 2026. Published in La Juventude Rebelde

[T]he media and social networks have deployed an offensive that relentlessly repeats expressions of anti-Cuban euphoria.

Germany: Trump and Ukraine: Thinly Veiled Blackmail

February 14, 2026. Published in Die Tageszeitung

Trump is threatening to cut Kyiv's U.S. security guarantees ... What is this man talking about? There are no ... commitments from Washington regarding ... security.

Austria: Jeff Bezos Is Not Solely To Blame for The Washington Post’s Decline

February 14, 2026. Published in Der Standard

[E]ven a new owner ... would be unable to avoid making cuts to the editorial staff, and even that wouldn’t guarantee the Post’s survival.

Japan: Diplomacy between Major Nations and Japan: Create a Unified Core of Mid-Level Nations

February 16, 2026. Published in Nishinippon Shimbun

The greatest challenges to be faced are the relationship with the U.S., our ally, and the relationship with China, our neighbor.

Topics

Iraq: From Noriega to Maduro: The Logic of Force in US Policy

February 19, 2026. Published in alsabaah

When political legitimacy becomes contingent on recognition by a superpower, populations lose their right to self-determination and democracy becomes a selective tool.

Mexico: The United States: Arms Supplier to Drug Traffickers

February 17, 2026. Published in La Jornada

[T]he U.S. government itself is a major supplier to the cartels that the White House claims to be pursuing with all its might.

India: What’s behind the Layoffs at The Washington Post?

February 17, 2026. Published in Amar Ujala

The Washington Post Guild, the staff union, questioned Bezos' commitment, saying that if he is no longer willing to invest in its mission, the institution needs a steward who understands it.