Obama’s Relentless Opponents

A few hours remain for America’s politicians to prevent the government from running out of money. The tea party is fully prepared to torpedo Obama’s hated health care reform, but even if the president were prepared to compromise, he would not sacrifice his biggest success. It seems bizarre: At the moment, it is easier for Obama to negotiate with Iran than with Republicans.

Barack Obama recently chose very different words to describe two conflicts. First of all, he spoke of Iran, its regime an enemy of the U.S. since 1979 and whose head of state he telephoned on Friday. When the U.S. president gave his account of it, he used the word “respect” three times and stated “deep respect” for the Iranian people. Afterward, he mentioned a few other opponents, whom he labeled as extremists and firebrands. He did not mean Iran’s Quds Force, but the U.S. representatives of the right-wing, populist tea party. Not one single time did he say “respect.”

It is easier for Obama to talk to a theocracy in the Middle East than politicians who meet only a few streets away from the White House. In contrast to his Iranian counterpart, Hassan Rouhani, he does not speak to the Republicans at all, except to notify them that there is nothing to discuss. So while an easing of tension between Iran and the U.S. is in the offing for the first time in decades, the domestic political crisis in Washington could lead to the government having to close down because of a lack of money.

Obama’s Opponents Are Similar to Each Other

The lights are still not out, neither in the U.S. Department of State, nor in Iran’s shady atomic labs. Washington’s politicians could pull together in the end, and the American-Iranian spring could end in disappointment, even in war. However, at the moment, the dynamic is exactly the opposite: In the nuclear dispute, both sides are slowly coming to the conclusion that an escalation will bring no more gains. In the U.S. budget dispute, the opposite is happening: Each side has concluded that more conflict is useful because it harms the opponent most.

In some respects, Obama’s opponents are similar to each other: They see themselves as revolutionaries and define themselves through their resistance to a greater power. Iran’s clerics have previously chased away a monarch installed by America; they see their system as an alternative to that of the Americans. Iran’s most senior leader, Ali Khamenei, has campaigned for a long time “to divide America, even to the last threads.” The tea party, too, sees itself as revolutionary. It developed from the opposition to Obama’s health care reform and a state it does not see as caring, but as rampant and patronizing. The tea party preaches unlimited freedom and a minimalist political system. Its activists are faithful to the Constitution — insofar as they will vote democratically — but they mistrust the spirit of the Constitution, deriding every compromise as a betrayal.

The Tea Party Is Holding Barack Obama for Ransom

The mullahs in Iran, as well as America’s right-wing populists, are described at times as being insane and from outer space. In reality, they behave relatively rationally in terms of their beliefs and interests. Years of sanctions have exhausted Iran. For the moment, the regime sees an interlocutor in Obama, with whom it could find reconciliation, while saving face and without having to call an end to the revolution. On the contrary, the tea party sees its revolution as just beginning. Driven by their active rank-and-file, they control the Republican Party in the lower House and are trying to hold Obama for ransom: If he does not take his health care reform back, they will refuse him a budget. That is the same as a prospective buyer burning down the house because he could not come to an agreement on the price with the seller.

Obama is a man of compromises, who often makes large concessions to his opponents. However, he will not sacrifice his health care reform: General health insurance is his biggest domestic success, and he will not give it away for opponents who call into question not only his politics, but also his personal integrity. In contrast to his relationship with Rouhani, this conflict is not just ideological, but personal. Obama can only hope that public opinion turns against the right following a government collapse, not him.

Ultimately, the outcome of both conflicts will depend on how much profit Obama can promise to his opponents. If Tehran should align itself with the West in the nuclear dispute, the regime could secure its survival in that it will free itself from the sanctions and placate the country. Right-wing U.S. representatives are calculating somewhat differently: They carry no responsibility for a large, starving population. In their right-wing electoral districts, they are unchallenged, and the more stubborn they remain, the less they are challenged. Opponents who cannot lose are the most relentless.