to View - Griffith College Dublin

international |
international |
All Barack
The United States President Barack
Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace
Prize based on his guarantee for nuclear
disarmament, yet is this not an example
where the Democrat is being honoured for
words rather than achievements.
Mr Obama’s victory in last year’s presidential
election campaign was greeted with rapturous
global applause. The media hailed it as the
beginning of a new era after the calamitous
policies of the George W. Bush era. Mr Obama
has led a campaign with messages of “hope”
and “change”, but has much really changed
In the 12 months since the former Illinois
senator’s inauguration, the US still has record
levels of unemployment, the global banks
are still in crisis, and the wars with Iraq and
Afghanistan are still raging. It would be naïve
of us to expect Mr Obama to produce miracles
overnight. The campaign was cunningly
brilliant in appealing to a disillusioned
electorate, desperate for change.
But a fickle electorate is not a patient one
and it is no wonder the approval ratings have
dipped as he has so far struggled to deliver on
many of the larger issues. Not all of this is his
fault of course, as he inherited a lot of these
problems from the previous administrations’
malpractices. Mr Bush never provided exit
strategies for its wars in Afghanistan or Iraq
and the US banking system is essentially the
same under-regulated system that has existed
since the Reagan era.
Early success
and no bite..
By signing an order to close Guantanamo
Bay in his first week as president, Obama
could bolster his “Yes We Can” image without
confronting much opposition. Boosted by
this image, Obama would then find it easier
to get congressional support for his $787
billion stimulus package. When this legislation
by Sean Gildea
Global financial crisis hampering Obama’s
promises of change
eventually passed through Congress, albeit
without the support of Republicans, it was
indeed a significant success for Mr Obama’s
cabinet.
Other successes include the repealing of the
unpopular Bush law which prevented federal
funding for stem-cell research. However, with
issues such as unemployment, health-care
and education, the average American is hardly
concerned with the study of stem cells.
Unclear messages
Mr Obama’s delivery on election promises
has been quite paltry in the grand scheme of
things. His inevitable slip in public approval
has been due to an unclear message he is
sending to the American public. During his
presidential campaign, the 48-year-old listed
withdrawal of troops from Iraq and the
introduction of universal health care as his
top priorities.
He has set target dates for a gradual
withdrawal in Iraq, but has found no option
but to increase troop levels in Afghanistan
and expand his military budget. He is finding it
difficult to get support from the Democrats on
these issues, and there seems to be tension
within the party as a result.
His proposed health care bill is also facing
opposition from not only Republicans, but
from some within his own party too. Unless
Mr Obama can rally support on these issues
quickly, the Democrats may find themselves
handing control of Congress over to the
Republicans in next year’s mid-term elections
(though still unlikely).
It is imperative for Mr Obama that the health
care bill is passed. If he can get this done soon,
he should be able to re-focus his party and realign
divisions before the November elections
in 2010. He has shown before this is possible
with his nomination of Hillary Rodham Clinton
as Secretary of State.
It was an inspired and humble nomination to
a rival who pushed him a huge distance for
the Democratic presidential runner in 2008.
By offering Mrs Clinton a top cabinet position,
he could ease any lingering tension that may
have existed between the Clinton and Obama
camps. On top of this, he gets a well-regarded
and capable politician as his foreign policy
chief.
Foreign policies
Although his approval rating has declined
domestically, the president remains a
consistently popular figure abroad. He
has managed to restore the US’s image
internationally, which was left in tatters after
the Bush years.
He has done so by engaging countries the
US was traditionally hostile to - Iran, North
Korea, Russia and Cuba - with messages of
“dialogue” and “cooperation”. Such offerings
have undoubtedly impressed those on the
Norwegian Nobel Committee, who were keen
to award him with the Nobel Prize only 9
months into his presidency.
Of course, Mr Obama’s willingness for making
those statements says very little about lifting
sanctions on the countries in question.
His efforts to thaw relations with Cuba
culminated in an ease in travel restrictions
for Cuban Americans. It’s hardly anything to
shout about. Mr Obama is high on sentiment
and has to date, in my opinion, struggled to
implement any significant changes in the US
and abroad.
Politics is about timing, and who knows,
maybe Mr Obama is hiding an ace up his
sleeve, waiting for the right moment to
pounce. It’s still early days.
U.S. and Russian relations improving despite Obama’s
Nobel Prize victory
By Lidea Okorokova
Once bitter dealings between the United
States and Russia set during George
W. Bush’s presidency appear to be taking
a U-turn, Russian state owned and private
media outlets reported last summer. During
a visit to Moscow in July, the US president,
Barack Obama, said the US wants to “reset”
relations with Russia.
In September 2009, Washington shelved
its plans to deploy strategic anti-missile
interceptors in Eastern Europe. The Russian
government was pleased with Mr Obama’s
scrapping of aggressive foreign policies
undertaken by Mr Bush.
Last month in Oslo, Mr Obama was
controversially awarded the Nobel Peace
Prize for “for his extraordinary efforts to
strengthen international diplomacy and
cooperation between peoples”. According to
the Nobel Prize committee, Mr Obama was
given the honour because of his decisions to
pull US troops out of Iraq and by continuing
the “military operation against the Taliban” in
Afghanistan.
The committee’s press release stated that
through Mr Obama’s policies “democracy
and human rights” would be “strengthened”
around the globe. Many experts believe the
Nobel Prize committee’s choice was made to
encourage Obama to act more appropriately
and change the way global politics is played
out.
They did not say whether Mr Obama’s efforts
in Eastern Europe are to be considered,
but what is clear is that Russian-American
relations may well improve under the former
Illinois senator’s presidency. Few citizens in
Russia would have expected the committee
to offer the Nobel Peace Prize to Mr Obama
and quite a few living there had expected the
current Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev,
to receive the award.
In 1990, the then Soviet Union President,
Mikhail Gorbachev, won a Nobel Peace Prize
“for his leading role in the peace process
which today characterises important parts
of the international community”. In simple
terms he won it for making the reunification
of Germany possible and for slowing down
the arms race.
In addition, political analysts in the
Motherland believed that Dmitry Medvedev
would have constituted a more worthy winner
of this year’s Peace Prize.
The Daily Moscow Times published an
opinion piece by Vladimir Frolov, president
of LEFF Group, a government-relations and
PR company, who believes “Obama won
his Nobel for a number of flowery foreign
policy speeches and a vision for a nuclearfree
world that is not likely to take shape
in his lifetime”. Frolov says “from this
perspective, Medvedev’s call in 2008 for a
new, all-encompassing security architecture
in Europe is a much more realistic and no less
peacemaking undertaking worthy of a Nobel”.
Medvedev is seen by many as a new wave of
politician in Russia, even though he seems still
to be under the sway of the country’s primeminister,
Vladimir Putin. Medvedev is being
encouraged by the media to go the opposite
way of Putin, with regard to his policies, and
appears to be taking some heed. Thus, vast
swathes of ordinary Russians would have
liked to have seen Medvedev receive such a
prestigious award.
Speaking of public relations, there is a wellknown
and circulated opinion among the
educated classes, that the Russian and
American governments should employ the
same public relations experts to maintain
a positive public opinion. Ketchum Inc.,
based in Washington DC, named Maslov PR
company, located in Moscow, as its official
representative in 2006. The two firms have
worked closely together since 1993, when a
new Russian constitution was adopted.
If you have not watched the movie “Spinning
Boris” you will probably not understand what
is so important about these PR companies.
In “Spinning Boris” three American PR men
come to Moscow and work closely with
Yeltsin’s daughter (who was the head of the
elections campaign at the time) to help him
win the 1996 free elections.
The film starts with the words “based on a
true story”. Ketchum Inc. and Maslov PR did
work together to shift the Russians’ attention
from the Communist Party’s leader, Zyuganov,
back to Yeltsin as they entered the second
round of the elections in 1996. Boris Yeltsin
won the elections, dancing and cheering his
way to the hearts of Russians during that
summer’s campaign.
Even if Mr Obama’s Nobel Prize came as a
shock to the Russian people, it is not seen
as an obstacle to the ongoing improvement
in relations between Whitehouse and
Kremlin officials. Moscow, indeed, has
recently sounded a lighter note to the Nobel
Committee’s choice and is more accepting of
Obama’s Nobel win.
Mr Medvedev and his US counterpart are set
to sign a new deal on nuclear arms, called
START-III, before 5 December, commemorating
Obama’s award. Negotiations are now being
held by representatives from both countries
on the new START-III arms cut deal.
12 13