Apologies for the delay in getting this up, but I wanted to give priority to Tanya’s very important post on the events in Belgrade and Keith’s commentary on the G-20.

Yesterday, I posted over at Care2, offering my thoughts on Obama’s UN speech.  I urge you to go read the whole thing, but I wanted to highlight one point:

[In his UN speech,] Obama used language consistent with communitarianism, a political philosophy that believes that individual rights must be balanced by the needs and interests of the community.  Communitarians argue that each community is shaped by its culture, but also believe that a strong civil society is a prerequisite for a strong community.

Now take a look at some of what Obama said during the speech:

“We can only reach [a future of peace an dprosperity] if we recognize that all nations have rights, but all nations have responsibilities as well.  That is the bargain that makes [the world] work.  That must be the guiding principle of international cooperation. . . .The United States stands ready to begin a new chapter of international cooperation — one that recognizes the rights and responsibilities of all nations.  And so with confidence in our cause, and with a commitment to our values, we call on all nations to join us in building the future that our people so richly deserve.”

As I noted in my post, it’s all there — the focus on balancing rights and responsibilities, the emphasis on needing to work together to achieve common goals, the challenge to other nations to the burden of solving the world’s most pressing problems.  Obama went out of his way to call on every nation live up to the UN’s founding vision — what he called “the wisdom that nations could advance their interests by acting together instead of splitting apart.”

It’s an interesting way to approach foreign policy.  The danger, of course is that communitarianism by its very nature requires consent, which other countries — including America’s partners and allies — may not want to grant.  Without it, it will be much harder to accomplish Obama’s vision.

That said, I think it’s a smart move by Obama, essentially giving the world a vision reasserts American leadership while acknowledging past American mistakes.  John Bolton may not like it (surprise!), but we’ve seen more progress on nukes in the past 72 hours than we had seen over the past nine years.

The first major test of Obama’s new approach will be Iran — especially after this morning’s news.  Obama has laid the groundwork, and others — particularly the Russians — appear willing to go along.

So far.

Related posts

• Why Hillary Still Might Say No
• When Stupidity Strikes
• Uganda or Digital Television?
• Turning the Tide on Nuclear Security
• Transition Watch: Anger in the Ranks