| 28.11.2008 |
|
||||||||
| Sometimes an article comes along that expresses exactly how one feels about a certain topic. Eric Frey's piece in the Forward about the continuing continential divide between Europe and the U.S. is such an article for me. Never mind that Europeans in Barack Obama finally got the president they wished for argues Frey, managing editor of Austria's Standard. Americans still better not to expect very much support from Europe when it comes to stabilizing Afghanistan and closing Guantanamo. His conclusion: "The old division that America does the fighting and Europe pays the bill is likely to continue in the new era of trans-Atlantic friendship." You can read Frey's excellent article here. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
| 27.11.2008 |
|
||||||||
| Tim wrote a few days ago about Robert Gates being asked by Barack Obama to stay on as Secretary of Defense. Gates is certainly Republican-leaning and served under President George Bush senior, but as Tim pointed out, he is apparently not a card-carrying Republican. That doesn't stop many American and international media outlets such as the AP, Time, The London Times, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung and Zuerich's Tages-Anzeiger from describing him as a Republican. That begs two questions: One, is there a reference guide or a data bank to check whether someone is in fact a registered Republican or Democrat? And two, is it fair to label politicians as members of a certain party because of their political past or inclination, even if they are not officially a member of that party? |
||||||||
|
||||||||
| 26.11.2008 |
|
||||||||
| The trickle of daily and sometimes hourly news of the administration positions filled by Barack Obama's transition team is a topic for many global news outlets. Here's a selection of how editorial writers from Austria, Spain, Belgium and Germany think about the names that have become public so far: President-elect Barack Obama's choices for top government posts are a sure sign that he has truly arrived in Washington and that he has to govern with the establishment and not against it, if he wants to accomplish something, comments Austria's Der Standard. "Obama's instinct switched the mode of operation to pragmatism, which is exemplified by his selection - Hillary Clinton, James Jones, Robert Gates, Timothy Geithner, Bill Richardson and Janet Napolitano who are all veterans. As a team, they stand more for roll-up-your-sleeves problem solving qualities than for partisan squabbles. The visionary element, for which Barack Obama's campaign was attacked by John McCain as "socialist" has no place anymore in this power game." But that, writes Der Standard, doesn't have to be a bad thing: "Someone who really wants "change" is better suited with pragmatism than with revolutions." Spain's conservative daily ABC (via dpa) argues that Barack Obama distances himself more and more from the idea of change than was the essence of his campaign. "The team that he surrounds himself with consists almost completely of politicians who had important positions under Bill Clinton. So far Obama relies only on veterans of the old establishment. One gets the impression that the U.S. is headed for a third term of the Clinton era." The Belgian paper "De Morgen" (via dpa) focuses on how Obama's cabinet selection is perceived by the liberal wing of his party. "The progressive Democrats expected a radical break with the past. Not just with eight years of Bush, but also with the preceeding Clinton years. Instead, they get Hillary Clinton on foreign policy, a chief of staff (Rahm Emanuel), an attorney general (Eric Holder) and an economics team (Timothy Geithner, Lawrence Summers) who all earned their credentials under President Bill Clinton. Defense (Robert Gates) and National Security (James Jones) fall almost certainly in the hands of Republicans, even though the biggest change could be made in those areas compared to recent years of war." Obama displays "an audacity for risk," comments Germany's Financial Times Deutschland. "To keep Gates is a wise but bold step because in his two years at the Pentagon he did an excellent job." Whether the choice of Paul Volcker to head a new special economic advisory group is a smart one, is debatable, writes the paper. On the one hand, it makes sense to establish a new body that doesn't have to concern itself with daily crisis management and can focus on abstract and long-term big themes like the reform of financial markets and the rebuilding of the U.S. economy. On the other hand, it is open whether this won't become a competitive group vis-á-vis the Treasury Department and the actual economic advisory group in the White House - the National Economic Council (NEC)." |
||||||||
|
||||||||
| 25.11.2008 |
|
||||||||
| Although it hasn't been confirmed yet, the U.S. and international media are convinced that Hillary Clinton will in fact become Barack Obama's Secretary of State. One has to be careful with political guesswork, but I also think that it is a done deal. Since it became public that President-elect Obama has pretty much offered the job to Clinton and details of the vetting process have been reported, it is hard to imagine how Senator Clinton could not get the top foreign policy position. It would be a servere blow for Hillary supporters, Democratic party unity and Senator Clinton herself, if she didn't get the job after all. The only imaginable scenario, in my opinion, is some kind of serious ethical issue that would compromise her ability to function as America's top diplomat. With Senator Clinton's ascent to the State Department considered to be a shoo-in, many outlets are already commenting what a Secretary of State Clinton would mean for the Obama administration, the U.S., and the world. Never shy to make his case, Christopher Hitchens argues in Slate why a Clinton in charge of foreign policy is the last thing we need. In a nutshell: "In matters of foreign policy, it has been proved time and again, the Clintons are devoted to no interest other than their own." As far as Hitchens is concerned, to pick Hillary Clinton as secretary of state is not magnanimous and wound-healing, but foolhardy and masochistic. Not impressed as well with Hillary Clinton as Obama's choice for secretary of state is the Financial Times. Not so much for the reason Hitchens' mentions, but for what the paper interestingly calls her lack of foreign policy experience. According to the FT, there are far more qualified candidates, so the question is why President-elect Obama wants her for the job. Why did Obama pick Clinton is also the question David Corn poses. Unfortunately, he doesn't come up with an answer. Steve Clemons, a couple of days ago, took a pretty useful stab at answering the question, arguing that Clinton could play the role of bad cop while Obama portrays the good cop. For Clemons, Clinton as secretary of state is a brilliant, but also a risky choice. Meanwhile from a more global perspective, the Jerusalem Post asks what's to worry about a Secretary of State Clinton that is decidedly pro-Israel, which is exactly why, according to the Washington Post, some in the Arab world are not enthused about that possibility. And finally, Germany's daily Die Welt in an editorial already predicts the return of Hillaryland. Secretary of State Clinton, according to the paper, will serve President Obama until a point of her own choosing. This time frame, writes Die Welt, could last until before the next presidential election in 2012. Then, offers the paper, the slogan in Hillaryland could be that one term for Obama is good enough. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
| 24.11.2008 |
|
||||||||
| Barack Obama clearly won the Catholic vote. And while President-elect Obama received a congratulary message from Pope Benedict XVI right after his election victory, the welcome message by many American Catholic bishops wasn't that friendly. Last week Cardinal J. Francis Stafford, head of the Apostolic Penitentiary of the Holy See, made news when he called Obama's policies "aggressive, disruptive and apocalyptic". Already earlier, America's Catholic Bishops vowed to confront President-elect Obama on abortion, stating that this is not an issue of compromise, but "a matter of absolutes." Keeping the statements about Barack Obama by American bishops in mind, it is interesting to read what the head of the German Catholic Bishops Conference, Robert Zollitsch, said about the President-elect. Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung asked Zollitsch, Archbishop of Freiburg: "Barack Obama has inspired people for his ideas. Can the church learn from Obama?" And here is Archbishop Zollitsch's reply: "Obama has raised high hopes. It is the dream of America, that he alluded to. Through it, it becomes clear that man lives by hope, and that he needs goals, and also those kind of goals that reach beyond today. I see the danger here with us that we are turning into a society that is old from within. But we need the drive to inspire people to get involved. We as church proclaim a message that gives orientation and keeps people grounded. We have a hope that points not just into this world. I don't mean that as an empty promise, but as an incredible force for renewal that fascinates me until today about the Christian message." The interesting aspect comparing Archbishop Zollitsch's answer to the statement made by Cardinal Stafford isn't abortion or any other issue. Archbishop Zollitsch surely opposes Obama's stance on abortion as much as his American counterparts. The interesting aspect is the tone and the receptiveness of Archbishop Zollitsch's statement. He didn't take the question as an opportunity to attack Obama, but instead analysed why he won and how the Catholic Church could learn from Obama's success. Again, that is not budging on issues important to the Catholic Church. Instead it shows a serious observation of and a willingness to apply the lessons learned by Obama's victory. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
| 10.11.2008 |
|
||||||||
| German businesses stand a good chance of benefiting from the change brought by the President elect Barack Obama and his administration. "He will support renewable energy and that opens up great opportunities for German companies who are among the market leaders in that area," Klaus Zimmermann, president of the German Institute of Economic Research (DIW) told Focus magazine. In fact, during the campaign Obama praised Germany's investment in renewable energy as a model. Zimmermann is skeptical about the effects of a planned stimulus package by the new administration for the U.S. economy. The package with a planned volume of 60 billion dollars is rather modest, said Zimmermann and added: "I wouldn't expect too much from that stimulus package." According to Zimmermann, due to the to massive budget deficit, the new administration will not be able to invest on a large scale. His advice to President elect Obama is to use the psychological effect that was created through his election to his favor and use it quickly. "In one year, this nimbus and all the glamor is gone." |
||||||||
|
||||||||
| 09.11.2008 |
|
||||||||
| Sure, the economic and financial crisis will be the unrivaled number one priority for President Barack Obama after taking office, and as some argue, even now. But as exemplified by Russia's special way of congratulating the newly elected president, and by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's lengthy message of congratulation, caution and advice to the President elect, Obama will simply not have the luxury to focus only on financial and economic turmoil at home. So what are the most pressing foreign policy issues Obama and his team need to stay on top of? For Richard Haas, President of the Council on Foreign Relations, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and to a lesser degree Iraq, should be the near-term foreign policy challenges for President Obama. Haas also thinks the new President should not make an early trip to Europe, since there is no crisis that needs immediate attention by the American president. Getting out of Iraq, cutting the military budget and telling the world that the U.S. is open for diplomacy are among the most important foreign policy issues, if you ask Slate's Fred Kaplan. James Downey of the Irish Independent braces his fellow countrymen that "pleasing Ireland" will not be among Barack Obama's priorities - "his remote Irish roots notwithstanding." Consequentially, the rest of Downey's good analysis examines many other global topics that are more pressing than events on the Emerald Isle. Obama's number one foreign policy priority should be to demilitarize U.S. foreign policy followed by removing foreign policy capabilities from the Pentagon and bringing it back to the State Department, opines Eric Margolis of the Edmonton Sun. And finally, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Iran, Afghanistan and Russia make the list of Brian Wilson, a former Minister of State at the British Foreign Office. I stumbled over his piece in Scotland on Sunday due to its slightly trashy, yet classy headline (next to the picture that will come straight to your mind when you read it): "Can super Obama save the world?" Who is right, who is wrong, and what global hotspot do you think they all missed? |
||||||||
|
||||||||
| 07.11.2008 |
|
||||||||
| Zbigniew Brzezinski, former National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter and foreign policy advisor to Barack Obama, told Deutsche Welle what kind of change he expects President Obama to bring to U.S. foreign policy: "There will be a change. There will certainly be a change in its philosophy, in its priorities, but there will not be a dramatic change in all of its manifestations. You have to think of foreign policy as, for example, a boat moving on the sea. A huge ocean liner doesn't change its course in the way that a fast motor boat does. Therefore it is not possible for the United States dramatically to change every one of its policies. But I think there will be a significant shift in substance and in tone." To read our entire interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski click here. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
| 06.11.2008 |
|
||||||||
| We try not to do much self promotion at Across the Pond. But since we have done some pretty good interviews about the U.S. election at DW-WORLD.DE, allow me to pass on some links. Here is our interview with Fred Kempe, President of the Atlantic Council of the United States and former editor of the Wall Street Journal Europe. Here is our interview with Hans Blix, former UN Chief Weapons Inspector and former Head of the IAEA (in German). And here is our interview with Rainder Steenblock, OSCE election observer in Ohio and spokesman on European affairs for the Greens in the German Bundestag (in German). I'll update the post, if I can provide English versions of the interviews. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
| 04.11.2008 |
|
||||||||
| Today is the day. If you live in the U.S. have fun voting. If you live outside the U.S. have fun watching how the election plays out. In the mood for an election party? Go to The Washingtonian's After hours blog to find out where to hang out in DC. Go to Bild.de to find out where to party the election away in Berlin. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
| 03.11.2008 |
|
||||||||
| German daily Tagesspiegel asked a slew of prominent people what they would dream up for the next American president. Here's what director Wim Wenders, former NHL player and now coach of Berlin's hockey team Eisbären Berlin, Don Jackson, and pop artist James Rosenquist had to say: Wim Wenders: "My hopes for the next American president are first that his name is Barack Obama and that he secondly brings this big, vast country out of its deep provinciality back to the world. Americans have been living far too long in an imaginary parallel world that is not taking into consideration the needs and hardships of our planet earth." Don Jackson: "I am not saying that the current goverment was totally wrong, I liked some things about its philosophy. But the country needs a shift in direction. We had the "bad boy" Bush, now we need a more gentle face, because our image in the world has to improve." James Rosenquist: "We will witness a slow, positive change in our economy should Obama win the election. I hope and believe that we will bring good statesmanship to our relations with the world because Obama is not afraid of negotiations. The new administration will not exhibit the same reactionary military conduct as the last one. I am an optimist because there are many good ideas out there that people could make use of. I look forward to better relations with Germany, Europe and the rest of the world." For all the other voices collected by Tagesspiegel (in German), click here. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
| 02.11.2008 |
|
||||||||
| Some conservative media outfits have been trying to make an issue out of the fact that Barack Obama's campaign paid approximately 700,000 U.S. dollars to German companies in connection with his Berlin speech this summer. I really don't see what the issue with those expenses is supposed to be. Obama's European trip this summer was meant to bolster his foreign policy credentials and therefore clearly campaign-related. His highly anticipated speech at the Victory Column was as much targeted to Americans back in the U.S. as it was to a German or global audience. So it is not particularly newsworthy, nor scandalous, that the Obama campaign pays for lighting, sounds and other services necessary for the Berlin speech. Having said that, I also don't think the fact the McCain campaign paid for Sarah Palin's outfit is a major issue. Palin, before being nominated as John McCain's running mate, didn't have to be present on the national and international stage. If she had to upgrade her wardrobe as a result of it, those costs are also campaign-related. Politically, the price tag of Palin's clothes could be more of problem for the self-proclaimed spokeswoman of hockey mums. Admittedly the new wardrobe wasn't exactly a bargain. But seriously: It should be common sense that a vice presidential candidate meeting international leaders at the United Nations needs the proper attire for those events. I am sure hockey mums agree with that too. |
||||||||
|
||||||||