The overall reaction that I had to watching Barack Obama’s speech in Berlin this afternoon was mainly visceral. What he said made much less of an impression on me than the spectacle itself. The most remarkable part of it was that Barack Obama has not yet been elected president. And, yet, over a hundred thousand Germans turned out to hear what he had to say and they mobbed him after the speech just trying to get close enough to touch him.
No polling can really express how Europeans view America and American leadership. After eight years of policies that the majority of Europeans oppose it is easy to forget how much they accept and expect America to lead the West. The reservoir of legitimacy for America’s lead-role was on full display in the Tiergarten. And so was the tremendous amount of hope that the crowd placed in Barack Obama’s ability to lead.
This is not to say that Barack Obama’s message was about American Exceptionalism. It was a call for unity and a commonality of purpose for tackling the big issues we all collectively face. Perhaps his boldest proposal was to move toward total nuclear disarmament. But he also hit on the need for NATO to succeed in Afghanistan, for Iraq to succeed in their reconstruction, for Lebanon to achieve stability, for progress on the Israeli/Palestine issue, for America to do more on global warming, and for more to be done on human rights and HIV/AIDS. Obama didn’t suggest that America can tackle these problems alone. He explicitly stated the opposite. But he also made clear that America is ready to lead on these issues and it was clear the audience eagerly embraced that strategy.
It would have been an amazing event even if a president had given the speech. That a mere nominee gave the oration speaks volumes about how out of balance Trans-Atlantic relations have become during the Bush administration. I think an apt comparison is how Rudy Guiliani gained fame and goodwill on 9/11 when the president went AWOL and left the country craving leadership and direction. Once again, Bush’s glaring failures have opened the door for someone else to step up and do the job that he is singularly incapable of performing.
And, yet, parts of this make me uneasy. I’m all for an American Restoration up to a point. But I’m also firmly convinced that America cannot afford the costs in dollars and security risks that are entailed in being the sole hegemon of the West. We cannot be responsible for carrying the load on anti-proliferation, UN Security Council enforcement, and humanitarian efforts. We need to share more of the load and that involves sharing more of the leadership. Other countries need to increase their capabilities. In return, we need to become more deferential and collaborative. If nothing else, our taxpayers need the relief. But it’s more than that. There is a cost to being the leader that goes beyond dollars. We also suffer increased security risks and with that comes pressures that undermine our basic civil liberties. We can be a Republic or an Empire, but I am not sure we can long be both.
Nevertheless, Obama’s performance was excellent. And it demonstrated for the first time in a long time just how indispensable American power is in the short-term.
Well I haven’t seen any clips from the speech since I’m at work, but from everything that I gather the reception he received is a testament to how much desire there is in Europe for the United States to once again play a credible role on the world stage. I understand your uneasiness but, frankly, what else can be expected? The Europeans don’t want to dislike America. There is such a long a close relationship that they long to have some restoration of civility and respect. The United States has gone on one long and disastrous drunk for the last eight years. And the Europeans see in Obama the hope that some sense of sobriety might just be around the corner.
If you were them wouldn’t you be excited too?
Finally, there appears to be a chance the prodigal son of the civilized world community might just return home. This might have been the first step of a “Welcome Back!”.
.
This is actually similar to the voices heard in media reports off the street in Berlin. The seven years of agony looms to its end, the Germans have a great respect for the American (historic) ideals. It’s time for change and it’s time for America to lead on issues of human rights, the environment and green energy. The Europeans haven’t neglected to invest in energysaving buildings en products. It’s citizens have universal health care and the infrastructure of cities, roads and public transportation is in place. To be a leader in the world, the nation needs to lead in the economy, balanced budget in government spending and by chance a trade surplus. The US has wasted it’s financial resources on the Iraq war, going it alone and failing in the end. That’s how empires end through extending its reach beyond the capabilities. In addition, domestic financial corruption does the rest and the blue collar laborer is the expendable commodity. I don’t envy Barack Hussein Obama for the great task ahead, he’ll need the support from all democrats nationwide.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
Why does the US have to lead??? It would be great and enough if it would cooperate with the rest of the world.
I don’t necessarily think they want us to lead. Right now I think the Europeans would be happy with an alliance around common causes as opposed to the arrogance and the obstinate attitude which has been thrown in their faces for the last eight years. They have been belittled, ridiculed and scorned by the representative leadership of this country for eight years. Just the possibility of having us back in the world game as an ally has to be considered good news to them.
Oh, I agree, but it is the US and at times Obama that talks about restoring being the leader of the world again.
I would say getting rid of Bush is a good thing, but many people here are very unsure about Obama, what does he stand for, are his words worth anything, can he be trusted. I do not think it will be enough for Obama being elected to restore the faith of the rest of the world in the US. it is definitely not enough for me.
Who could blame anyone for feeling this way? I certainly don’t.
The sins of this country, especially over the last eight years and even up to this day, certainly cannot be washed away through a singular act like electing a new President. We as a country will be doing penance for years to come to win once again the faith of the world.
Trust? Hell, if I don’t trust this country right now(and I’m not sure I do), how can I expect anyone else in the world to trust it? I have told my long-suffering wife many times that I’ll be long dead and gone before we shake the last disgusting vestiges of what has been wrought in our name by this administration and all their enablers, both Democrats and Republicans. A sad, sad legacy for this country right now.
Der Spiegel The World President To-Be
.
Not only the genocide in the 20th century through communism and facsism and the two world wars. look at the most recent example of failure by the world community: the Balkan Wars, Rwanda and Darfur genocides in Africa. Because America took the lead in military action after the Serb massacre in Screbrenica, this led to the Dayton accords. The EU manifests itself in perpetual discussions and policy disagreements. Don’t expect any recourse on the issue of human rights from Russia, India, China or Japan. Europeans are leading in theoretical science and politics, when ideas need to be transformed to end products, there is still one nation that performs.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
This might be true, but currently the US is not an example for human rights and so far I can not remember Obama saying anything about gitmo, or turning back all the laws concerning human rights of foreigners or even US citizens in the US. Until they lead by example I am not willing to follow.
yeah, everything else aside, Obama gives a great speech. He’ll be a much better public face for America than the baboon currently flinging its own feces all over the oval office.
On the other hand, I listened intently to the speech, and Andria Mitchell’s comment “that Barack’s brief acknowledge in the speech that the US had made some mistakes, was a reference to RACE RELATIONS in the US”, was totally incorrect. Barack was actually referring generally to the international blunders that the US has made in the past ( and there are many).
Her evaluation of this portion of Obama’s speech unwittingly exposes the strong bias of racial sensitivity present in the subconscious of many white Americans.
From my perspective it was a continuation of Barack’s original campaign theme that empowerment to overcome any obstacle is in the hands of the people in all nations dedicated to freedom for its people, and this includes all of the known current and future disasters around the globe. He frequently reminded his audience that natural boundaries such as oceans no longer can provide protection against festering pernicious problems dedicated to the destruction of mankind as in this 21st century we are truly all one world. But if nations come together with sincerity of purpose to address these problems, they will be resolved. Great speech, Wendell Wilke would have loved it.
save us from Andrea Mitchell who should have retired with her husband, Mr. Irrational Exuberance Bubble.
Obviously Andrea does not read and does not understand what she hears. And she always looks to divide.
Some headlines:
Obama urges global fight against terror
Barack Obama – the world can expect better of America
A call for Unity
I had a similar reaction, but a different takeaway. It didn’t strike me that he was saying American should lead (physically or financially) in these areas, I got that we as a people of this globe need to work together to fix the problems and that any one nation leading is not the best way to go about it.
the man called for the world to come together in order to solve the major issues. a bravo statement of the position that the world must come together.
now- off topic in a way.
did the mcain state that Iraq was the first war since 9/11?
spmeone- please tell me that I heard wrong!
“What he said made much less of an impression on me than the spectacle itself.” Well, then it worked for you! The whole thing was for domestic consumption. And it may backfire. Mega-scale hubris, pretension, and grandiosity. Ask not what your PR machine and money can do for you. I’m glad Merkel didn’t allow him to speak at Brandenburg Gate. JFK, he ain’t. And I agree with posters who see attendance as reflecting curiosity, a response to celebrity, the organization of the advance team, and — on a higher level — a hopeful “welcome back” to the US, rather than any need or longing for its ‘leadership,’ thank you very much. It would help if the US could get over itself and do some following. Indispensable power? Good luck. We all do get more or less what we deserve.
“I think an apt comparison is how Rudy Guiliani gained fame and goodwill on 9/11 when the president went AWOL and left the country craving leadership and direction.”
In the very specific sense you mean it, yes. The nothingness of G.W. Bush is the common factor in both cases. And yet, the idea of comparing Giuliani to Obama makes me gag.
‘Nevertheless, Obama’s performance was excellent.’
I wouldn’t doubt that for a second.
‘And it demonstrated for the first time in a long time just how indispensable American power is in the short-term.’
Obama would agree. But after six months of his presidency he won’t be able to draw even half the crowd in Berlin that he did today.
Here is an interesting comment from a German who was at the speech in Berlin – found in the Independent comment section.
Obama urges global fight against terror – Europe, World – The Independent
“…a milk-toast speach saying nothing.” Exactly.
What I got out of the speech was that of humility and respect for others. Work together and get things done rather than the opposite, realizing that we all are not perfect, we can work together and solve problems.
I do think his humility is that which brings others to him , knowing all the time, he will bring a more perfect union, to not just us, but the whole world, if his views of how to get things done will accomplish the solving of problem’s just not being a part of the problem/the problem.
I personally think he was trying to say I apologize for all that has happened in our name, and will try to do a better job and that I -Obama- challenge the world to make it a better place, if we just work together.
Anyhow, that is what I took away from it.
the rest of the horribleness of what is going on that is not being addressed, must be addressed by the nations of the world and rid it of the madness of it all.
I think your spot on Brenda, let’s just hope it bares fruit ; )
I beleive the majority of the world wants the same thing, PEACE….
it’s gonna take work, but it can be done, only if we stay steadfast, and dilligent in our ideals.
“You know it don’t come easy “
peace
Given how little good Obama actually intends to do as president, I found the bombastic rhetoric of the speech scary. It sounds like we’ve got another demagogue in the making.
I found it very inspirational and a breath of fresh air.
In the speech he said, “At times, we’ve struggled to keep the promise of liberty and equality for all of our people.” Well he hasn’t struggled very hard, given that he voted for the FISA bill. It’s sad to see that someone from his (my) generation can pile on the b.s. like the best of them.
All that he said of substance is that he wants Europeans to help Americans kill brown people in Afghanistan.
That people like you find his demagoguery inspirational is precisely what makes it scary.
See ‘Another Point of View” at http://farnwide.blogspot.com/2008/07/another-point-of-view.html#links:
….I remember listening to Barack Obama’s victory speech in Iowa, entirely impressed with the verbal virtuoso, thinking a new era had taken flight. While I still believe Obama would make a good president, and he’s this foreigner’s personal choice, I find my enthusiasm waning in one sense.
I’m glad I had the opportunity to listen to Obama’s speech firsthand today, because the subsequent commentary shows no relationship to my perceptions… To be frank, the lofty rhetoric left me cold, bored even. Soaring over the mountain tops, the linguistic gymnastics dazzling the masses, and yet it all seemed entirely dramatic, dare I say cheesy.
This isn’t the 1960’s, Kennedy’s dead, and I really don’t want to relive outdated romantic language that sounded Shakespearian, but really hardly illustrated any relationship to reality. I tend to be inspired by straight ahead, no bull, clear language, that is rooted in ordinary circumstance. This Moses on the mount routine tends to get old over time, so optimistic to be practically useless, so inspiring, doomed for failure. I’m not looking for someone to follow, and much of the time these speechs are almost intellectually pandering in their sermon style delivery.
Obama is great in low key interviews, Obama is excellent in articulating coherent answers to complex questions. Obama, on the mass stage, speaking before the rapt audience, delivering the biblical phrasing, over the top idealist jargon that touches the stratosphere, not so much anymore. I had a dream, but then I woke up and had a cold shower. Refreshing actually.
The Europeans lived through the trauma that America has imposed on itself 70 years ago. The memory of that tragedy is still fresh, especially in Germany. I recall writing to a highly placed French in the fall of 2002 that the Bush government was reactionary beyond anything that any of us could have believed, and that we were in for a rough ride. I didn’t know then how rough it was going to be.
Europeans want the United States to get back on track. What is disturbing to them, and thould be disturbing to us, is that we elected fascists after a period of unprecedented prosperity. We don’t even have the excuse the Germans had when Hitler came in with a strong minority in 1928. They had a depression. We voted. That sent a signal to the rest of the world that we and our children will be living with for the rest of our and their lives.
The Europeans lived through the trauma that America has imposed on itself 70 years ago. The memory of that tragedy is still fresh, especially in Germany. I recall writing to a highly placed French in the fall of 2002 that the Bush government was reactionary beyond anything that any of us could have believed, and that we were in for a rough ride. I didn’t know then how rough it was going to be.
Europeans want the United States to get back on track. What is disturbing to them, and thould be disturbing to us, is that we elected fascists after a period of unprecedented prosperity. We don’t even have the excuse the Germans had when Hitler came in with a strong minority in 1928. They had a depression. We voted. That sent a signal to the rest of the world that we and our children will be living with for the rest of our and their lives.
Knut, the fascists ascended to power in the U.S. on November 22, 1963. It was a coup in front of everyone.
With each election the intelligence community has attempted and pretty much succeeded in consolidating its power.
The FISA capitulation was not to George Bush, who will be gone in a few months. It was a capitulation to the intelligence community, which intends to stay in power no matter who is elected.
There is no hope that anyone currently in leadership positions in the Republican Party will stand up to the intelligence community, or even want to. Can Obama and the Democratic Party? They won’t have to as long as Americans refuse to acknowledge what has happened.
What I didn’t like:
Otherwise an excellent speech.
However does it not cause a bit of dissonance when he was obliged to refer to torture? It really is a problem when the candidate basically has to apologize for past wrongs before he takes responsibility for the government. Or is this the message that progressives are supposed to get? Then what does it mean?
I think you are misreading the Europeans if you think they are looking for their leader in the United States. I don’t think they have ever looked to the U.S. to be the sole hegemon of the West or any other part of the world. In fact, its rather self-congratulatory, if not arrogant, to make that assumption. Europeans think a good deal more of themselves and their capabilities, and a whole lot less of the U.S. than that. I think what Europeans would like is for the U.S. to stop pretending it is so all might and superior and for once act like a partner. To the extent that this was what Obama expressed, it was that, not a desire for leadership, was what resonated with them.
And if I am reading you correctly, that is what you would like to see as well, not, apparently for the same reasons, but if the goal is the same the reasons do not necessarily have to match.
Booman Tribune ~ A Visceral Reaction to Berlin
YES! and thank you!