A Stain on Obama’s Prospects

U.S. President Barack Hussein Obama — Nobel Peace Prize winner for unknown but great future exploits, and perhaps the main political hope for mankind at the beginning of the 21st century — has landed in a big puddle of oil. He was expected to nearly turn the world around. But now, due to British oil company BP’s accident, Obama runs the risk of remaining merely a fighter with the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Sometimes, unforeseeable external circumstances allow a better understanding of a person’s true scope and role in history.

U.S. presidents don’t have a tradition of addressing the nation on a regular basis. Each address is an extraordinary event, caused by special factors. George W. Bush addressed the nation from the Oval Office on the evening of September 11, 2001, immediately after the terrorist attacks, which predetermined both his terms as president. Ronald Reagan spoke after the tragic death of seven American astronauts aboard the Challenger space shuttle on January 28, 1986. John F. Kennedy announced to the nation that the U.S. stood on the threshold of nuclear confrontation with the Soviet Union during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Richard Nixon announced his early departure from the White House after Watergate.

Barack Obama delivered an 18-minute address (which is unusually long, by American standards) to the nation about a banal oil slick. He did so because the oil slick is not going away and is becoming a national disaster. America is very unhappy with the way Barack Obama and his administration are handling this man-made disaster. So much so that there is an active discussion in the U.S. about the oil slick potentially preventing Obama from serving a second term.

National survey data was released on the same day as the presidential address. According to the survey, 52 percent of Americans had a negative opinion of the way Obama has handled the oil spill. In the most affected state of Louisiana, nearly two-thirds (62 percent) were dissatisfied. That’s even worse than the nation’s shattering assessment of the George W. Bush administration’s actions after Hurricane Katrina in 2005. While Obama was in Florida during his two-day inspection visits to several states, a sign encountered by his motorcade said, “Obama, you are useless.”

Prior to the unfortunate incident with the oil platform, Obama had a year and a half to showcase himself, in grander and more attractive affairs, in terms of the legacy he intended to leave for his descendants. During this time, the “new thinking”* of the American administration mainly manifested itself in Obama’s pleasant (for all audiences), but mutually exclusive, speeches. His speeches really are colorful, especially against the background of his oratorically undistinguished predecessor. The reset (perezagruzka) with Russia doesn’t really matter for Obama’s great world feats. Of course, a new treaty on strategic offensive arms is a good thing. But a real possibility of nuclear war between Russia and the U.S. is no more believable than Iran becoming a Western-style secular democratic country.

The Bush administration wanted the country to become both a beacon of democracy and a stronghold of the “right” world order, but couldn’t achieve those goals. It seems that the Obama administration does not want those things and cannot accomplish them. However, after September 11, 2001, as long as Bush was in office, there were no subsequent terrorist attacks on the U.S.

On the other hand, Obama had a chance to make history right away by bringing the country out of the global economic crisis he inherited from the Republicans. That’s a lot better than a tedious struggle with the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Actually, the state of the U.S. economy at the time of the next presidential election will largely determine the future political destiny of the current occupant of the Oval Office. However, Obama has not done any great deeds, nor made any great decisions in the economic sphere (though none may actually be possible).

Nevertheless, the oil stain on the American president’s reputation might be a happy sign of fate, rather than a blot. Paradoxically, if the struggle with the consequences of the disaster in the Gulf of Mexico drags on, the Obama administration will have an excuse for its toothless, confusing and ineffective foreign policy, saying that it has to deal with urgent domestic matters of special importance. How could we have made the world better when we were up to our ears in oil?

I’ll be honest: From the get go, I’ve never had any illusions about Obama’s ability to improve world politics. He immediately struck me as just a nice, glamorous man with a very politically correct fate, not someone who holds power over the fate of the world. In his speeches and books, even in his dance-like walk, you could see the charming careerist, not a global politician. By the way, in terms of the small political impact, Obama coincided very well with the current Russian president. The only difference is that, for the last 10 years, due to the caliber of the country, no one expected Russian presidents to make monumental improvements on an international scale.

Of course, it’s still possible that a miracle may happen. But so far, everything is pointing to Obama being yet another mediocre politician, in whom hundreds of millions of people around the world held extraordinary hope. It would be unfortunate if history remembered Barack Obama only as the first black U.S. president. In that sense, even the first black president of Russia would have been cooler. Whatever happens, for now, the great career of the received-in-advance Nobel laureate is covered with a thick layer of oil from the Gulf of Mexico.

*Translator’s Note: The author is making a reference to Gorbachev’s concept of new thinking.