Barack Obama and Europe

The 200,000 Germans who applauded Barack Obama the previous month are a small sample of those Europeans who, in a great majority, support the Democratic candidate for the White House. If they were to vote on November 4, there would be no doubt as to who would be the winner. However, isn’t this an illusionary infatuation based in part on a double misunderstanding? The first misunderstanding being that George W. Bush’s personality was the determining factor of America’s foreign policy during the last eight years and consequently his departure would lead to a positive change. The second being that the next president, especially if he is called Barack Obama, will be more attentive to Europeans’ advice or rather their demands.

Certainly the democratic candidate’s views are more pleasant to Europeans’ ears than the rhetoric recently heard from Washington. Every time that he is presented with the occasion, he insists on the necessity for cooperation between allies, on the new bridges that must be constructed between the two shores of the Atlantic and on shared values between the United States and Europe. But what is there of it in reality?

The Europeans dream of an America more inclined to respecting the rules of multilateralism, which still remain to be defined. An America that is more disposed to play the game of international organizations, be it the UN or NATO. An America ready to rally agreements reached on climate change or the international justice. They count on a change in the White House in order that United States, in one sense, becomes more “European.”

To believe this is to forget few traits of American foreign policy that will be re-exposed after the next presidential election. Simply stated, the national interests of Americans will not change overnight. Barack Obama, in this regard is not distinguishable from John McCain, his Republican rival, since he insists on American military superiority and on the calling of his country to assume the leadership role in the world. It is probable that the resurgence of international tension provoked by the war between Russia and Georgia will further lead him to harden this stance. Since he would be naïve in thinking that George Bush’s foreign policy during the last two mandates had represented a deviance from the American tradition. If there was a deviance, one must search for it in the radicalism of expression rather than direction.

A former French ambassador in Washington noted that Europeans had a tendency to share the same values as American Democrats, but that they got along better with Republican administrations. According to this former ambassador this was because Republicans had less of an ideological vision in regards to international relations than Democrats. While this might not have been the case with George Bush, the difficulties of the past few years have lead to an idealization of trans-Atlantic relationships during Bill Clinton’s times. Barack Obama, if elected, could very well follow the footsteps of this previous Democratic administration. During the 1990s, his emissaries traveled throughout Europe polling the Europeans. In chancelleries, they were saying if you agree with us support our policies. If you do not agree with us, we will act alone.

The manner in which the Democratic candidate for the White House sees the relationship with Europe is not very much different. It reminds us of an old anecdote about the life of a couple: with my partner, we equally share the decision, says the wife. When we agree, it is he who decides. When we disagree, it is me.