No Wings Wanted
Published in Frankfurter Rundschau
(Germany) on 4 December 2008
by Dietmar Ostermann (link to
original)
Obama has put together a cabinet of centrists. His foreign policy will be determined by consensus. Anyone who thinks he is betraying his promise of change wasn’t really paying attention to what he said.
Whoever runs a campaign under the banner of a new start and wants to be so totally new, fresh, and different from his stuck-in-the-past predecessors shouldn’t be surprised to have his every word and action weighed and measured.
There will be many familiar faces seated at Obama’s table when his cabinet meets: Hillary Clinton, his former party rival and Robert Gates, the man who has served for two years as George W. Bush’s Secretary of Defense.
As far as anyone can see, even the young cabinet secretaries who were recently appointed could all be counted as members of the establishment. You won’t find any political rebels on Obama’s team; no outsiders, no opposing spirits – and also no one from the political wings, whether right or left.
America’s future administration is a centrist team, a team of tested movers and shakers, and a group in which experience is paramount. Whoever sees that as a betrayal of the promised “change” – and sees Obama as a pushover – that person was only half listening during the campaign, or is only half listening now.
If Obama has a political leitmotif, then it has to be his search for pragmatic solutions. The future president refuses to be hemmed in by old ideologies. He takes his direction from a few basic convictions: his high aspirations for society, his promise of a fair chance for everybody, and his commitment to shared responsibility.
What that means in concrete terms and what policies will come from it can’t be determined by applying the classic liberal or conservative templates to his complex personality. It’s more his attempt to combine social democratic ideals in the American sense with his political style of seeking a broad consensus. In a nation shaped by decades of conservatism, that could easily be seen as a contradiction.
But what Obama promised America has basically always been a new middle, that bi-partisan “functioning consensus” he described in his book, “The Audacity of Hope.” Obama strongly believes this consensus is the prerequisite for demolishing political roadblocks and attacking national and global problems. To this extent, his policies regarding personnel are not in conflict with the major promises he made during his campaign; indeed, they are consistent with them.
With Hillary Clinton, he has included a central figure of his own party in his administration without whose support his planned reforms might be more difficult to achieve.
Keeping the current Secretary of Defense and appointing General James Jones as White House Security Advisor builds an immediate bridge to the military, where many remain skeptical about his promised quick withdrawal of combat troops from Iraq. To attempt such a complicated and controversial maneuver during his first year in office would be risky and would require an intelligent and comprehensive strategy. If the withdrawal turned into a disaster, Iraq could become a dangerous powder keg for Obama as quickly as it did for George W. Bush. That’s why he adopted his future vice president’s guiding principle that America’s foreign and security policies can only be successful if they are supported by a broad consensus at home.
The biggest danger for consensus politics lies in the averages. If it’s just the lowest common denominator, it’s hardly worth making it the basis for the new direction and change Obama promises. Up until now, however, Obama hasn’t proven to be a procrastinator. He silently and professionally assembled a competent advisory team. He has made it plain that he expects open debate and he welcomes differing opinions, but also that he will not hesitate to make controversial decisions on his own if necessary. And here Obama remains true to himself – he is the guarantor of change. We will see what that change is and exactly how it comes about after his inauguration.
Whoever runs a campaign under the banner of a new start and wants to be so totally new, fresh, and different from his stuck-in-the-past predecessors shouldn’t be surprised to have his every word and action weighed and measured.
There will be many familiar faces seated at Obama’s table when his cabinet meets: Hillary Clinton, his former party rival and Robert Gates, the man who has served for two years as George W. Bush’s Secretary of Defense.
As far as anyone can see, even the young cabinet secretaries who were recently appointed could all be counted as members of the establishment. You won’t find any political rebels on Obama’s team; no outsiders, no opposing spirits – and also no one from the political wings, whether right or left.
America’s future administration is a centrist team, a team of tested movers and shakers, and a group in which experience is paramount. Whoever sees that as a betrayal of the promised “change” – and sees Obama as a pushover – that person was only half listening during the campaign, or is only half listening now.
If Obama has a political leitmotif, then it has to be his search for pragmatic solutions. The future president refuses to be hemmed in by old ideologies. He takes his direction from a few basic convictions: his high aspirations for society, his promise of a fair chance for everybody, and his commitment to shared responsibility.
What that means in concrete terms and what policies will come from it can’t be determined by applying the classic liberal or conservative templates to his complex personality. It’s more his attempt to combine social democratic ideals in the American sense with his political style of seeking a broad consensus. In a nation shaped by decades of conservatism, that could easily be seen as a contradiction.
But what Obama promised America has basically always been a new middle, that bi-partisan “functioning consensus” he described in his book, “The Audacity of Hope.” Obama strongly believes this consensus is the prerequisite for demolishing political roadblocks and attacking national and global problems. To this extent, his policies regarding personnel are not in conflict with the major promises he made during his campaign; indeed, they are consistent with them.
With Hillary Clinton, he has included a central figure of his own party in his administration without whose support his planned reforms might be more difficult to achieve.
Keeping the current Secretary of Defense and appointing General James Jones as White House Security Advisor builds an immediate bridge to the military, where many remain skeptical about his promised quick withdrawal of combat troops from Iraq. To attempt such a complicated and controversial maneuver during his first year in office would be risky and would require an intelligent and comprehensive strategy. If the withdrawal turned into a disaster, Iraq could become a dangerous powder keg for Obama as quickly as it did for George W. Bush. That’s why he adopted his future vice president’s guiding principle that America’s foreign and security policies can only be successful if they are supported by a broad consensus at home.
The biggest danger for consensus politics lies in the averages. If it’s just the lowest common denominator, it’s hardly worth making it the basis for the new direction and change Obama promises. Up until now, however, Obama hasn’t proven to be a procrastinator. He silently and professionally assembled a competent advisory team. He has made it plain that he expects open debate and he welcomes differing opinions, but also that he will not hesitate to make controversial decisions on his own if necessary. And here Obama remains true to himself – he is the guarantor of change. We will see what that change is and exactly how it comes about after his inauguration.
Next article![]( "Children Are Asking Santa for Jobs for their Parents")
