Julian Zelizer: Obama's raised expectations overseas like Woodrow Wilson. Uh oh.
[Julian E. Zelizer is a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School. His new book, Arsenal of Democracy: The Politics of National Security -- From World War II to the War on Terrorism, will be published this fall by Basic Books. For more information about this author, see www.julianzelizer.com.]
One of the most dramatic moments during the 2008 campaign occurred when then-candidate Barack Obama traveled to Germany and spoke before an estimated crowd of 200,000 adoring Europeans. The enthusiasm for Barack Obama and what he promised was overwhelming, and was palpable to anyone who was watching. On the night of the election, there were numerous stories of people waiting for the returns all over the world, from Europe to Africa, celebrating the promise of a new chapter in America's relationship with the world. The reception during the president's most recent trip overseas was equally positive.
Now President Obama must deliver on this promise. Thus far, some critics worry that President Obama's policies might be too close to the President Bush's when it comes to foreign affairs, even with their substantive differences over Iraq. The president retained many familiar faces from the past administration, such as Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense and James Jones as National Security Advisor. The president enraged some supporters when he appointed Senator Hillary Clinton to be Secretary of State, the very Democrat who Obama had attacked throughout the primaries as a centrist Democrat who went too far in carrying out the policies of the Republican administration. At this point, it is not clear how much the build-up in Afghanistan signals a break from the past or a continuation of the Bush policies. This week's announcement that the administration would not seek criminal charges against CIA officials who participated in interrogation under Bush left some of Obama's supporters frustrated that lessons had not been learned.
The stakes are high because people overseas can sometimes take seriously the promises that American presidents make during a campaign. Abandoning those promises can have a devastating impact.
The impact of President Obama overseas trips brings back memories of President Woodrow Wilson's popularity during WWI. Professor Erez Manela's new book, The Wilsonian Moment, recounts how the Wilson administration undertook an enormous campaign in 1917 and 1918 to distribute speeches that the president made about self-determination. In countries that had suffered from the impact of colonialism, including Egypt, India, China, and Korea, the speeches by Wilson were galvanizing. The advent of the telegraph, international news services, and the accelerated speed of information technology allowed his messages to reach across the globe. The Committee on Public Information played a big role, under the progressive journalist George Creel, in disseminating the messages through daily news bulletins, feature articles and films.
All these factors had a significant impact on how Wilson was viewed overseas. According to the Chinese journalist Hollington Tong, President Wilson "is a wonderful man, having a firm grasp of the world situation and knowing exactly how to deal with it. That is why he is to-day heading the movement to make the world safe for democracy. President Wilson is kind hearted in dealing with a weak and oppressed nation; just in his relationship with a strong power; and extremely severe in his treatment of predatory countries."
There was a widespread belief, according to Manela, that the president would live up his promise that smaller nations were entitled to receive treatment equal to the major powers which had dominated them for so long.
But they were wrong. During the Paris Peace Conference, representatives from these countries were heartbroken as they watched the president renege on his ideals because he was more interested in creating the League of Nations than in fulfilling self-determination. In China, Mao Zedong said that the Allied leaders acted like "a bunch of robbers bent on securing territories and indemnities... [they] cynically championed self-determination" but did not act on it. Manela argues that Wilson's promises and rhetoric lived on so that oppressed nations later turned to the Soviets as a better source for fulfilling Wilson's ideals.
While the situations of Wilson and Obama are very different, the lessons that Wilson offers the current administration are relevant. When expectations are high abroad for what Americans will do, and what a particular president will stand for, the impact of turning back on those promises can be huge. Right now, though our public attention is turned toward inward with the economic collapse, it is important to remember that this campaign began with an extended debate over the conduct of foreign policy. The Obama campaign represented an insurgent movement against unilateralism, preemptive war and militarism that the Bush administration had promoted. The vote for Obama over McCain was also seen as a rejection of the interrogation techniques used in the war on terrorism.
If Obama, who is naturally now focused on the economy, does not follow through on his campaign promises, it would be a profound disappointment for many in the world who saw this election as a democratic decision to seek out a new relationship with the world and to support, through diplomacy and economic assistance, the progressive forces in volatile areas of the globe who are seeking stability and peace as opposed to terrorism and war.
More soon from the academy....
Read entire article at Huffington Post (Blog)
One of the most dramatic moments during the 2008 campaign occurred when then-candidate Barack Obama traveled to Germany and spoke before an estimated crowd of 200,000 adoring Europeans. The enthusiasm for Barack Obama and what he promised was overwhelming, and was palpable to anyone who was watching. On the night of the election, there were numerous stories of people waiting for the returns all over the world, from Europe to Africa, celebrating the promise of a new chapter in America's relationship with the world. The reception during the president's most recent trip overseas was equally positive.
Now President Obama must deliver on this promise. Thus far, some critics worry that President Obama's policies might be too close to the President Bush's when it comes to foreign affairs, even with their substantive differences over Iraq. The president retained many familiar faces from the past administration, such as Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense and James Jones as National Security Advisor. The president enraged some supporters when he appointed Senator Hillary Clinton to be Secretary of State, the very Democrat who Obama had attacked throughout the primaries as a centrist Democrat who went too far in carrying out the policies of the Republican administration. At this point, it is not clear how much the build-up in Afghanistan signals a break from the past or a continuation of the Bush policies. This week's announcement that the administration would not seek criminal charges against CIA officials who participated in interrogation under Bush left some of Obama's supporters frustrated that lessons had not been learned.
The stakes are high because people overseas can sometimes take seriously the promises that American presidents make during a campaign. Abandoning those promises can have a devastating impact.
The impact of President Obama overseas trips brings back memories of President Woodrow Wilson's popularity during WWI. Professor Erez Manela's new book, The Wilsonian Moment, recounts how the Wilson administration undertook an enormous campaign in 1917 and 1918 to distribute speeches that the president made about self-determination. In countries that had suffered from the impact of colonialism, including Egypt, India, China, and Korea, the speeches by Wilson were galvanizing. The advent of the telegraph, international news services, and the accelerated speed of information technology allowed his messages to reach across the globe. The Committee on Public Information played a big role, under the progressive journalist George Creel, in disseminating the messages through daily news bulletins, feature articles and films.
All these factors had a significant impact on how Wilson was viewed overseas. According to the Chinese journalist Hollington Tong, President Wilson "is a wonderful man, having a firm grasp of the world situation and knowing exactly how to deal with it. That is why he is to-day heading the movement to make the world safe for democracy. President Wilson is kind hearted in dealing with a weak and oppressed nation; just in his relationship with a strong power; and extremely severe in his treatment of predatory countries."
There was a widespread belief, according to Manela, that the president would live up his promise that smaller nations were entitled to receive treatment equal to the major powers which had dominated them for so long.
But they were wrong. During the Paris Peace Conference, representatives from these countries were heartbroken as they watched the president renege on his ideals because he was more interested in creating the League of Nations than in fulfilling self-determination. In China, Mao Zedong said that the Allied leaders acted like "a bunch of robbers bent on securing territories and indemnities... [they] cynically championed self-determination" but did not act on it. Manela argues that Wilson's promises and rhetoric lived on so that oppressed nations later turned to the Soviets as a better source for fulfilling Wilson's ideals.
While the situations of Wilson and Obama are very different, the lessons that Wilson offers the current administration are relevant. When expectations are high abroad for what Americans will do, and what a particular president will stand for, the impact of turning back on those promises can be huge. Right now, though our public attention is turned toward inward with the economic collapse, it is important to remember that this campaign began with an extended debate over the conduct of foreign policy. The Obama campaign represented an insurgent movement against unilateralism, preemptive war and militarism that the Bush administration had promoted. The vote for Obama over McCain was also seen as a rejection of the interrogation techniques used in the war on terrorism.
If Obama, who is naturally now focused on the economy, does not follow through on his campaign promises, it would be a profound disappointment for many in the world who saw this election as a democratic decision to seek out a new relationship with the world and to support, through diplomacy and economic assistance, the progressive forces in volatile areas of the globe who are seeking stability and peace as opposed to terrorism and war.
More soon from the academy....