Europe Not So Fond of Obama Anymore
Published in Volkskrant
(Netherlands) on 16 July 2010
by Paul Brill (link to original)
The Afghan Taliban, the Pakistani Taliban, the Chinese minister who lectured him in Copenhagen, al-Qaida, Al Shabaab, the firm of Khamenei & Ahmadinejad, the Israelis, the neo-caudillo Hugo Chávez, the left wing of the Democratic party, the environmental movement, the large insurance companies, the right-leaning Tea Party movement—everyone in this motley collection is displeased with President Obama, and the Europeans now join their ranks. As a presidential candidate, Obama mobilized more than 200,000 deliriously enthusiastic Berliners when he visited their city in 2008, but the love has cooled.
Reasonable
I do have to explain the phrase “the Europeans.” It is not the case that all Europeans frown when Obama’s name is mentioned. In European opinion polls, he still scores reasonably, even though the enthusiasm for his persona is clearly less than it was two years ago. Rather, it is mainly in European hallways of power that the White House resident is grumbled about.
That grumbling came out last week—albeit very concisely, in an interview The Times conducted with José Manuel Barroso, the president of the European Committee. The main subjects were the state of affairs in the European Union, the financial crisis, the attack on the euro, the position of the Committee and the plans for tighter supervision of budget policies of the member states. But, in passing, Barroso also made a critical footnote on the American-European relationship; it’s “not living up to its potential.” What’s more, a “missed opportunity” threatens for the transatlantic relationship that went through such a difficult time during the reign of Obama’s predecessor.
Demonstrations
The Times picked up these quotes, but it also explored the mood in Berlin, Paris and London. A spokesperson in Downing Street, remembering the old bond between London and Washington, kept slightly aloof with a plea for a more intensive American-European dialogue. An anonymous close advisor of President Nicolas Sarkozy was less obliging: “Obama does not come from the same tradition as his predecessors. He is interested in Asia and Russia, not Europe. There is no sense of a privileged relationship.” And a German government official went a step further: “If our austerity cuts lead to street demos, the protesters will be shouting out phrases they heard from Obama. How do you think that makes us feel?”
This last remark is a very quaint reproach. Differences of opinion exist between the U.S. and the EU regarding the best medicine to prevent the revival of a crisis. Washington bets on continual stimulation measures, and Europe emphasizes the necessity to reduce government shortages. This cannot be surprising given their differences in economic thinking and societal configuration.
Ammunition
You could say that where Americans prefer to hit the gas, Europeans quickly put their foot on the brake. Yet the two worked to reach global agreement on halving of government shortages last month at the G20 summit in Toronto. It is therefore a weak claim to blame Obama and his growth philosophy for providing ammunition to European demonstrators.
It is true that the American president does not give off the impression of cherishing deep feelings for Europe. He seems to have seen that it is not easy to do business with a mini-UN. A personal relationship—such as the one Ronald Reagan had with Margaret Thatcher, Bill Clinton with Tony Blair and even the despised George Bush with multiple European leaders—is also lacking.
Insecurity
But is this really such a serious deficiency? I think that the complaints of Europeans stem from insecurity about their own status in the world. Let’s be honest: with the complicated structure of the EU, we are indeed a kind of pocket-sized United Nations, complete with both pretensions and the weaknesses that characterize the organization of nations. And the paradox is that while the U.S. has finally implemented a social security system modeled after a European one, European governments see themselves forced to greatly slim down their welfare state.
That hurts, not only because of the protests on the street, but also because setting up the welfare state—with its 35-hour work week and pension at 60 years old—was labelled not too long ago as a civilizing mission, which the whole world could take as an example. No wonder that the process of—how shall I put it—progressive European insight is being viewed from the U.S. with some hints of malicious pleasure, not to mention the thinly veiled contempt from China, the new world power.
Reasonable
I do have to explain the phrase “the Europeans.” It is not the case that all Europeans frown when Obama’s name is mentioned. In European opinion polls, he still scores reasonably, even though the enthusiasm for his persona is clearly less than it was two years ago. Rather, it is mainly in European hallways of power that the White House resident is grumbled about.
That grumbling came out last week—albeit very concisely, in an interview The Times conducted with José Manuel Barroso, the president of the European Committee. The main subjects were the state of affairs in the European Union, the financial crisis, the attack on the euro, the position of the Committee and the plans for tighter supervision of budget policies of the member states. But, in passing, Barroso also made a critical footnote on the American-European relationship; it’s “not living up to its potential.” What’s more, a “missed opportunity” threatens for the transatlantic relationship that went through such a difficult time during the reign of Obama’s predecessor.
Demonstrations
The Times picked up these quotes, but it also explored the mood in Berlin, Paris and London. A spokesperson in Downing Street, remembering the old bond between London and Washington, kept slightly aloof with a plea for a more intensive American-European dialogue. An anonymous close advisor of President Nicolas Sarkozy was less obliging: “Obama does not come from the same tradition as his predecessors. He is interested in Asia and Russia, not Europe. There is no sense of a privileged relationship.” And a German government official went a step further: “If our austerity cuts lead to street demos, the protesters will be shouting out phrases they heard from Obama. How do you think that makes us feel?”
This last remark is a very quaint reproach. Differences of opinion exist between the U.S. and the EU regarding the best medicine to prevent the revival of a crisis. Washington bets on continual stimulation measures, and Europe emphasizes the necessity to reduce government shortages. This cannot be surprising given their differences in economic thinking and societal configuration.
Ammunition
You could say that where Americans prefer to hit the gas, Europeans quickly put their foot on the brake. Yet the two worked to reach global agreement on halving of government shortages last month at the G20 summit in Toronto. It is therefore a weak claim to blame Obama and his growth philosophy for providing ammunition to European demonstrators.
It is true that the American president does not give off the impression of cherishing deep feelings for Europe. He seems to have seen that it is not easy to do business with a mini-UN. A personal relationship—such as the one Ronald Reagan had with Margaret Thatcher, Bill Clinton with Tony Blair and even the despised George Bush with multiple European leaders—is also lacking.
Insecurity
But is this really such a serious deficiency? I think that the complaints of Europeans stem from insecurity about their own status in the world. Let’s be honest: with the complicated structure of the EU, we are indeed a kind of pocket-sized United Nations, complete with both pretensions and the weaknesses that characterize the organization of nations. And the paradox is that while the U.S. has finally implemented a social security system modeled after a European one, European governments see themselves forced to greatly slim down their welfare state.
That hurts, not only because of the protests on the street, but also because setting up the welfare state—with its 35-hour work week and pension at 60 years old—was labelled not too long ago as a civilizing mission, which the whole world could take as an example. No wonder that the process of—how shall I put it—progressive European insight is being viewed from the U.S. with some hints of malicious pleasure, not to mention the thinly veiled contempt from China, the new world power.