The Reason Why “Change” or “Dream” Were Not in Obama’s Speech

Published in Asahi Shinbun
(Japan) on 22 January 2009
by Toshiya Umehara (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Yota Mukaiyachi. Edited by .
U.S. President Obama erased his famous "change" from his inauguration speech on the 20th. Instead, he appealed throughout his speech for responsibility and obligation under difficult circumstance as well as a return to the American ideals such as rule of law and human rights.

What stood out in his speech was his attitude in pointing out the reality of the crisis, the history, and how the country should change from now on, while he minimized the use of vocabulary that could bring cheers from the huge crowd. In terms of the historic moment of the first African-American president, he talked emotionally of the meaning of his presidency given the fact his Kenyan father would not have been greeted in a restaurant under Jim Crow nearly 60 years ago. Nonetheless, he did not expand on the topic, hinting at his attitude to overcome the race issue.

Since he is well known for his excellent speechs, media expected that a historic line would come from his mouth. But he must have thought that he should express his determination rather than congratulate a position that shoulders real responsibilities to rule a nation.

Looking at the vocabulary he used in the speech, he never used "dream," which would remind one of Dr. King, and both "hope" and "ideals" appeared only three times. On the other hand, he used "new" eleven times, "generations" eight times, and "spirit" five times and explained his views on ideals clearly. The names of countries mentioned in the speech besides the U.S. were Iraq, Afghanistan, and past battlefields in the U.S. history. This highlights the beginnings of a war-time administration.

He also mentioned, if not named, Islamic fundamentalists such as Al-Qaeda and declared to "defeat" them, aiming at showing his bold determination as a commander-in-chief. On the other hand, he hinted that he is ready to talk to anti-American nations, such as Iran, if they changed their stubborn rhetoric, although he pointed out that they are on the wrong side. And this is characteristic of Obama diplomacy.

David Brooks of the New York Times told the US PBS TV, "I remember an image of Mr. Obama and emotions of the surrounding crowd more clearly than each word in his speech."


オバマ米大統領は20日の就任演説で、候補者としての決め言葉だった「チェンジ(変革)」という言葉を封印していた。代わりに合衆国憲法に象徴される、法の支配や人権といった建国の理想への回帰と、苦難の下での責任や義務をもっぱら訴えた。

 大向こうから喝采を集めるような言葉は控え、冷静に、米国が置かれた危機の現状や過去の歴史、今後のあるべき姿を指摘する姿勢が目立った。アフリカ系(黒人)として初の大統領就任という歴史的な機会については、ケニア出身で、60年足らず前なら人種隔離政策の下、レストランで客扱いすらされなかった父親を持つ自分が大統領になったことの意味を感慨深げに語った。だが話を広げることはせず、人種問題を超越していく姿勢をうかがわせた。

 演説上手とされるオバマ氏だけに、事前の報道では、歴史に残るような名文句が飛び出すのではという期待もあった。だがオバマ氏自身は、実際に治政に責任を負うようになった立場として、祝意よりも決意を示すべきだ、との考えがあったとみられる。

 使った語句を見ても、故キング牧師の演説を想起させそうな「夢」という言葉は登場せず、「希望」と「理想」も3回ずつだった。それでも、「新しい」が11回、「世代」が8回、「精神(スピリット)」が5回と、理想とするビジョンは丁寧に語った。「アメリカ」以外に地名として言及されたのは過去の激戦場とイラク・アフガニスタンだけ。戦時の政権発足という様相が浮き彫りになった。

 国際テロ組織アルカイダなどイスラム過激派を、名指しこそ避けたが「負かす」と宣言したのも、「最高司令官」としての決意を示すねらいからとみられる。一方、イランなどを示すとみられる反米独裁国家に対しては、誤った側にいると指摘しつつ、かたくなな姿勢を改めれば対話もあり得るとの方針に、オバマ外交の特色がうかがえた。

ニューヨーク・タイムズ紙コラムニストのデービッド・ブルックス氏は米PBSテレビで「演説の個々の言葉より、オバマ氏の映像とそれを取り巻く群衆の感情がより鮮明に印象に残った」と語った。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Turkey: Europe’s Quiet Surrender

Australia: Donald Trump Is Not the Only Moving Part When It Comes to Global Trade

Spain: Global Aid without the US

Germany: Trump’s Disappointment Will Have No Adverse Consequences for Putin*

             

Austria: Trump Is Only Part of the Problem

Topics

Poland: Jędrzej Bielecki: Trump’s Pyrrhic Victory*

Austria: Trump Is Only Part of the Problem

Canada: Canada Must Match the Tax Incentives in Trump’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill’

Germany: Big Tech Wants a Say in EU Law: More Might for the Mighty

Germany: Trump’s Disappointment Will Have No Adverse Consequences for Putin*

             

Spain: Global Aid without the US

Spain: Not a Good Time for Solidarity

Related Articles

India: Trump’s Tariffs Have Hit South Korea and Japan: India Has Been Wise in Charting a Cautious Path

Japan: Iran Ceasefire Agreement: The Danger of Peace by Force

Japan: Trump’s 100 Days: A Future with No Visible Change So Far

Japan: US Administration Losing Credibility 3 Months into Policy of Threats

Japan: US-Japan Defense Minister Summit: US-Japan Defense Chief Talks Strengthen Concerns about Single-Minded Focus on Strength