Undiplomatic Banner
24th July 2008 Charles J. Brown
07:24 pm

Heute sind wir alle Amerikaner (Obama in Berlin)


I’ve spent a good part of the afternoon watching, listening to, reading, digesting, and reviewing other responses to Obama’s speech in Berlin today.  Not surprisingly, almost every commentator has reached a different conclusion, from “a stupendous ride” to “cliché[d], from “liberal internationalism” to “neoconservativsm with a human face.”

It was not his best speech, but it was a good one. And it was great to watch.  I loved hearing an American stand before Europeans and express clearly and concisely the idea that American values are global values, and vice versa.  I was thrilled to watch the crowd react so joyously.  I was delighted to hear him challenge Europeans on issues ranging from xenophobia to Afghanistan.  And after reading the text of the speech, I was pleased to see such a concrete expression of my own foreign policy views — what I would call either hard-headed internationalism or realistic globalism.

Someday, future historians may write that Obama’s speech marked the rebirth of good feelings between America and Europe, that it helped bring to an end to five-plus years of European anger towards and resentment of the United States.  Perhaps Obama’s speech will be remembered as the moment when the sentiments of Jean Marie Colombani’s famous editorial in the September 13, 2001 issue of Le Monde (”Nous Sommes Tous Americains”) returned, albeit as “Heute sind wir alle Amerikaner.”

And yet this afternoon, my main emotion is disquiet.  I find my hopes not nearly as strong as my fears.  I know neither I nor the rest of the pundit class were Obama’s target audience.  But the problem is, neither were the 200,000 Berliners who flocked to see him today. The people who really matter are the ones who will only see short clips of the speech on television, or who will only hear about it from their favorite talk radio mandarins:  average Americans, most of whom not only haven’t been to Europe, but also have no desire to go there.

What scares me is that the Berlin speech hurt Obama far more than it helped him, and that since it was the last event of his trip, it will overshadow his very real triumphs in Afghanistan and Iraq.  As I’ve noted before, most Americans view Europeans with a mix of suspicion and resentment.  There’s a reason that “cheese eating surrender monkeys” has become part of our popular lexicon.  And I have to think that the recent precipitous fall of the dollar against the Euro hasn’t helped matters.

But what worries me the most is that as Obama wowed the world, John McCain was sitting pretty in Ohio.  Since Obama left the States, McCain has grown increasingly bitter and nasty.  And now, much like Hillary Clinton before him, he appears increasingly willing to appeal to the worst devils of our nature.

This is what his campaign had to say today in response to Obama’s speech:

While Barack Obama took a premature victory lap today in the heart of Berlin, proclaiming himself a ‘citizen of the world,’ John McCain continued to make his case to the American citizens who will decide this election. Barack Obama offered eloquent praise for this country, but the contrast is clear. John McCain has dedicated his life to serving, improving and protecting America. Barack Obama spent an afternoon talking about it.

In less than three weeks, John McCain has transformed himself from an international statesman to an angry white male.  He has gone from desiring a debate on the issues to mounting a wholesale attack on Obama’s character.  He sounds increasingly desperate, which I find odd, given that the national polls have him only two to six points behind and many battleground state polls have him gaining.

I’m beginning to wonder whether the right word isn’t desperate, but rather cunning.

I don’t think it is a coincidence that this turn began largely after Steve Schmidt took over as McCain’s chief strategist.  Schmidt is a Rovian through and through; he believes that, as a Wall Street Journal profile of him put it recently, “a campaign needs one positive message about its own candidate, and one negative message about the opponent.”  It’s becoming increasingly evident that for Schmidt (and by extension McCain), the combination that’s working best is McCain as a prototypical American hero and Obama as the “other.”  It is, to paraphrase Rick Perlstein, straight out of Nixon’s “silent majority” playbook.

Just look at some of the moves we’ve seen since Obama clinched the nomination:  a commercial that describes McCain as “The American President Americans have been waiting for;” online ads that place photos of Obama side-by-side with Castro and Ahmadinejad; statements from campaign surrogates (too numerous to link to) questioning Obama’s priorities and even his patriotism; and McCain himself, in a statement that more than one commentator called unprecedented in the recent political history, suggesting that Obama is willing to lose a war to win a campaign.

I keep hoping that this is a temporary manifestation of McCain’s legendary temper.  I keep thinking that once McCain calms down about Maliki’s endorsement of the Obama timetable, we’ll see a return to the principled politician that so many Americans came to know and love.

But the more he and his campaign pursue this line of argument, the more I am convinced  that this is the real McCain, and that the happy warrior of the Straight Talk Express is nothing but a myth.

This entry was posted on Thursday, July 24th, 2008 at 7:24 pm and is filed under foreign policy, global economy, politics, world at home. It is tagged under , , , , , . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

There are currently 5 responses to “Heute sind wir alle Amerikaner (Obama in Berlin)”

Why not let us know what you think by adding your own comment! Your opinion is as valid as anyone else's, so come on... let us know what you think.

  1. 1 On July 24th, 2008, Junius said:

    Yes, an outstanding speech. Yes, what we should all want our president to believe. Yes, this is so different and so much better than what we have had for so many years. Yes, this reflects an America in which others (and we, ourselves) can believe in, again.

    And it is also very likely that the election is more or less over; between Malaki’s statement and Bush’s shift on troops in Iraq (helping to deprive McCain of his one key issue) and McCain’s looking older and older and older…..

    But…..will the “average American” who looks at the “commander in chief” issue as important and who has had doubts about Obama be reassured by this speech about his competence (if, indeed, these people either saw or will hear about the speech)? Or will they wonder why a candidate for president is giving a speech abroad to a “foreign” audience instead of focusing his attention here at home? We have so many times seen a kind of nativist grumbling about the injection of “foreign” elements into our politics…We do not yet know…but may know in the next few weeks..about whether this inspiration to Americans of a US president speaking for America abroad can also apply to a candidate speaking abroad….

    Junius

  2. 2 On July 25th, 2008, Steve said:

    I was able to watch the Berlin speech live, and found it quite moving (especially since I also view myself as a citizen of “the world” as well as of America). It was not, in the common sense of the word, a “campaign” speech, for it was not addressed to an audience that the candidate wanted to convince or energize.
    I found it to be more of a “Presidential” speech, basically telling Germany, Europe, and the world, in no uncertain terms: “We’re back!” And the European reactions that I have seen really welcomed the news — as Christine Ockrent of French television said, Europeans have been yearning for a return of that American spirit that so filled them with hope. (I remember vividly the despair that settled over France when JFK was killed — “the day the music died”, as it were. Not many Europeans have been humming along to our tune in recent years, but perhaps they will begin to do so again.)
    As for Senator McCain, I do not see him, or his handlers, as “cunning,” but rather as returning to the well-thumbed playbook which served the GOP so well for so long. The question that remains is whether it will serve them well again, or whether the American voting public (the only one that counts, no matter how many Berliners went to the party) will shake off its lethargy, take a deep breath, and vote for the future instead of voting for the past — again.

  3. 3 On July 25th, 2008, Jacob said:

    Charlie,

    If Undiplomatic is to live up to your intentions, which I know you are capable of, you need to shed the starry eyed, teenage angst ridden, unadulterated adoration of “Obama Boy” sycophancy. I hope you got a chance to read Brooks’ Op Ed in the NYT today for a much more balanced view of the speech.

    The selfsame adoring European populace who see in Obama the Commander-in-Chief who “thinks like us” have long forgotten the debt all of Europe owes to unadulterated, strongly militeristic as well as socio-economic, political and cultural leadership that America has provided the world over the past century through two world wars and beyond. Under the military intervention and subsequent protection of American taxpayers, Europe has transformed itself from a perrenial state of war, to perhaps the most peaceful real estate outside of the 50 States. Sure they can be all pacifist and righteous today, but could they have been had America not provided its leadership - which in Korea and Vietnam was not necessarily all that beautiful. And in the midst of the Marshall Plan, it looked very bleak indeed!

    With leadership and power comes responsibility - to keep the peace. To achieve peace, and/or to keep it requires one of two conditions to be met: either total defeat of one’s enemies, or (these are mutually exclusive) engagement with a foe who agrees to play by a mutually agreed set of rules ad principles (witness the Cold War). European citizenry tolerated a virtual constant state of war up to the 1900’s because the rules were well understood and adhered to. These were relatively “gentlemenly” fought contests. The horror and scaleability of the brutalities of both World Wars, shocked that same populace, finally, into seeking a better way. But they couldn’t have done it without American intervention and protection.

    Unfortunately, we don’t get to choose our foes - and they do get to choose whether to live by the rules or not. We live in a world where the current threats to peace come from those who openly reject our value system. The question is will the next Commander-in-Chief recognize that when your enemy choses to ignore the rules, his defeat is the only opton left? And I am not saying that this inevitably means a hot war! I can all too easily criticize the current administration for its simplistic approach. Yes Virginia, the Machine of State needs to propel itself with more than two gears (full frontal attack, and retreat). But a useful lesson can be gleaned from the Roman Empire - which lasted for a lot longer than many modern ones: all a Roman Citizen had to do was declare himself as such and he was guaranteed good treatment in the known world. The price of violating him was simply too high, and the benefits and prosperity that accompanied acquiesence were too enticing. As such, for me the declaration isn’t about whether “Ich bin ein Berliner” or “Heute sind wir alle Amerikaner.” The question is does “Civis Americanus Sum” means something or not? And is the American Leadership willing to enforce that? For Barak to show, ex ante (which he must to be elected) that he can stand up to that test he needs to offer us much more than vision and hope. As Brooks concludes “…optimism without reality isn’t eloquence. It’s Disney.”

  4. 4 On July 25th, 2008, Charles J. Brown said:

    Jacob, I want you to know that there is nothing “starry eyed” or “teenage angst ridden” about my sycophancy. It would be much more accurate to describe it as a hard-headed, fully mature sycophancy.

    And regarding Brooks’s comment about optimism without reality being Disney, first I would dispute that you can characterize what Obama said yesterday as optimism without reality. But even if I were to accept that characterization, I would take it over McCain’s vision, which is pessimism without reality. And that isn’t leadership — it’s a depressed Emo kid.

  5. 5 On July 25th, 2008, Jacob said:

    Charlie,

    Well said. But as you’ve heard me say before, I think Ron Silver’s speach at the last Republican Convention is very much still valid. There is only “one” thing (ok it’s a small set of things) that really matter. And I for one am yearning for an American Leader who “gets it” but is more adept at handling it than the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue (W gets it all right, but is inept at dealing with it).

    Whether Americans like it or not, “the West” is an American Empire. When will Americans wake up to the responsibility of Empire. When the U.S.S.R potentially threatened us with annihilation, we did ok. But since Ronald Reagan effectively put the Cold War into history, we have sort of wished we “didn’t have to” lead the world. Alas it doesn’t work that way. And we now have an ascendant Chinese, Indian and Arabian Empires, as well as a few lesser tyrants such as Venezuela. Some of these will ally with us (India?) Some will compete with us commercially first, but ultimately militarily if they have to (China?) and some want to take us on right now… so now what? Lead already!!! and stop kvetsching.

    Do I ish for a better choice than Obama/McCain? Absolutely. But given this choice, I know McCain is more apt to assume the mantle of leadership appropriately. If Obama backed his eloquence with substance, I’d be his biggest supporter. He had a GOLDEN opportunity to do so this past week, but all he offered was the same pablum. And it IS beginning to sound stale. I more readily cry watching Bambi now than listening to his rhetoric. That was NOT true when HE spoke at the Democratic Convention last.

    Is McCain gonna do what he thinks he has to do in order to win the election? you betcha. Do I wish neither side should have to play politics to win the election? you betcha. But out in Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania etc. that crap works. But I have heard McCain speak and he “gets it” in terms of what is really important, and he knows that just giving a rousing speach isn’t going to solve the problem. He spells out solutions.

    Oh, and lastly, yes he WAS right on the surge and he remains right that Iraq is going to need more help and support for longer than next year despite what Maliki says. Will you give him credit for being right? After all, by being right he helped ensure that we probably won’t need to be there 100 years from now.

Leave a Reply

CAPTCHA image

  • Polls

  • Should President-elect Obama appoint Hillary Clinton to serve as Secretary of State?

    View Results

    Loading ... Loading ...
  • Podcast Player

  • Podcast Feeds

    • View in iTunes
    • Any Podcatcher

  • Archive