We expect Ukraine will have shifted its political alignment toward
Russia, and Moscow will be rapidly moving to create a sphere of influence before
Obama can bring his attention — and U.S. power — to bear.
Obama will again turn to the Europeans to create a coalition to resist the
Russians. But the Europeans will again be divided. The Germans can’t afford to alienate the Russians because of
German energy dependence on Russia and because Germany does not
want to fight another Cold War. The British and French may be more inclined
to address the question, but certainly not to the point of resurrecting NATO as
a major military force. The Russians will be prepared to talk, and will want to
talk a great deal, all the while pursuing their own national interest of
increasing their power in what they call their “near abroad.”
Obama will have many options on domestic policy given his majorities in
Congress. But his Achilles’ heel, as it was for Bush and for many presidents,
will be foreign policy. He has made what appear to be three guarantees. First,
he will withdraw from Iraq. Second, he will focus on Afghanistan. Third, he will
oppose Russian expansionism. To deliver on the first promise, he must deal with
the Iranians. To deliver on the second, he must deal with the Taliban. To
deliver on the third, he must deal with the Europeans.
Global Finance and the European Problem
The Europeans will pose another critical problem, as they want a second Bretton Woods agreement. Some European
states appear to desire a set of international regulations for the financial
system. There are three problems with this.
First, unless Obama wants to change course dramatically, the U.S. and
European positions differ over the degree to which governments will regulate
interbank transactions. The Europeans want much more intrusion than the
Americans. They are far less averse to direct government controls than the
Americans have been. Obama has the power to shift American policy, but doing
that will make it harder to expand his base.
Second, the creation of an international regulatory body that has authority
over American banks would create a system where U.S. financial management was
subordinated to European financial management.
And third, the Europeans themselves have no common understanding of things.
Obama could thus quickly be drawn into complex EU policy issues that could tie
his hands in the United States. These could quickly turn into painful
negotiations, in which Obama’s allure to the Europeans will evaporate.
One of the foundations of Obama’s foreign policy — and one of the reasons the
Europeans have celebrated his election — was the perception that Obama is
prepared to work closely with the Europeans. He is in fact prepared to do so,
but his problem will be the same one Bush had: The Europeans are in no position to give the things that Obama
will need from them — namely, troops, a revived NATO to confront the
Russians and a global financial system that doesn’t subordinate American
financial authority to an international bureaucracy.
The Hard Road Ahead
Like any politician, Obama will face the challenge of having made a set of
promises that are not mutually supportive. Much of his challenge boils down to
problems that he needs to solve and that he wants European help on, but the
Europeans are not prepared to provide the type and amount of help he needs.
This, plus the fact that a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq requires an agreement with
Iran — something hard to imagine without a continued U.S. presence in Iraq —
gives Obama a difficult road to move on.
As with all American presidents (who face midterm elections with astonishing
speed), Obama’s foreign policy moves will be framed by his political support.
Institutionally, he will be powerful. In terms of popular support, he begins
knowing that almost half the country voted against him, and that he must
increase his base. He must exploit the honeymoon period, when his support will
expand, to bring another 5 percent or 10 percent of the public into his
coalition. These people voted against him; now he needs to convince them to
support him. But these are precisely the people who would regard talks with the
Taliban or Iran with deep distrust. And if negotiations with the Iranians cause
him to keep forces in Iraq, he will alienate his base without necessarily
winning over his opponents.
And there is always the unknown. There could be a terrorist attack, the
Russians could start pressuring the Baltic states, the Mexican situation could
deteriorate. The unknown by definition cannot be anticipated. And many foreign
leaders know it takes an administration months to settle in, something some will
try to take advantage of. On top of that, there is now nearly a three-month
window in which the old president is not yet out and the new president not yet
in.
Obama must deal with extraordinarily difficult foreign policy issues in the
context of an alliance failing not because of rough behavior among friends but
because the allies’ interests have diverged. He must deal with this in the
context of foreign policy positions difficult to sustain and reconcile, all
against the backdrop of almost half an electorate that voted against him versus
supporters who have enormous hopes vested in him. Obama knows all of this, of
course, as he indicated in his victory speech.
We will now find out if Obama understands the exercise of political power as
well as he understands the pursuit of that power. You really can’t know that
until after the fact. There is no reason to think he can’t finesse these
problems. Doing so will take cunning, trickery and the ability to make his
supporters forget the promises he made while keeping their support. It will also
require the ability to make some of his opponents embrace him despite the path
he will have to take. In other words, he will have to be cunning and ruthless
without appearing to be cunning and ruthless. That’s what successful presidents
do.
In the meantime, he should enjoy the transition. It’s frequently the best
part of a presidency.