Barack Hussain Obama won his way to the Oval Office at the White House on November 5, 2008. A product of interracial relationship – a Kenyan father and a Texas mother - his victory is a historical turn in US political evolution, as after over 40 years, Martin Luther King’s dream has become a reality. A black man finds himself to be the Number One at the White House, an event that by itself would redraw the domestic political map within the United States. Whether it would do the same in the international realm of the US politics around the world remains to be seen?  

Certainly, on January 20, 2009, President Obama will be stepping into a plethora of both domestic and international challenges – the worst financial crisis since the ‘Great Depression’, two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the “new war front” on the Pakistan’s tribal areas adjoining Afghanistan, the nuclear showdown with Iran, an ascendant India and China, a reasserting Russia - where Obama’s decisions as the leader of the world’s sole superpower, will reflect his commitment to his campaign slogan of ‘change’. “Change has come to America”, Barack declared in his victory speech, but will it be evident in his decisions as president of the United States of America when he grapples with the other ‘campaigns’ in the real world that the US has been involved with over the last two decades. In an interview at the Stanford University in May 2008 Madeline Albright, one of Barack’s many advisers, cited a “dangerous lack of effective leadership across the globe”, the question paramount on many minds across the world today is, will Barack Hussain Obama prove to be that “effective leader” who will bring his independent considered judgment to bear on decisions regarding contentious issues of peace and security? 

Or, will he be swamped by domestic political and economic challenges, of which he will have one too many, thereby leaving the foreign policy choices to his team of advisers and close cabinet members. Obama assembled several hundred foreign policy advisers during his presidential campaign, some of whom include such experts as former secretaries of state Madeline Albright and Warren Christopher, former secretary of defence William Perry, and Denis Ross who served as the US negotiator in the Middle East during the first president Bush and then later Clinton. Also, with John Kerry being named as the probable secretary of state, Obama may not need worry at all about foreign policy, or his lack of its grasp thereof. Speaking on Campbell Brown’s “No Bias, No Bull” on CNN on November 6, 2008, Madeline Albright outlined six top international challenges that she called the “umbrella issues” which the new president will face: 

• How to fight terrorism without creating more terrorists

• How to deal with a broken non-proliferation system so the worst weapons don’t get into the hands of the worst people 

• How to deal with the negative aspects of globalization and the growing gap between rich and poor 

• Issues involving energy, environment and rising food prices

• How to restore the good name of democracy 

• The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and their unintended consequences; dealing with North Korea and the Middle East

Even the choice of Obama’s vice president seems to have been a calculation in foreign policy terms since Senator Joseph Biden hardly lacks command of foreign policy issues facing the US today. That alone raises another question, how much influence would the vice president be wielding? In case of America, the vice president only undertakes a few ceremonial chores and become significant only in case a sitting president is assassinated, or is unable to continue in office. We have seen that President Bush’s number two, Dick Cheney has wielded considerable and power behind the scenes. A Senator as active as Joseph Biden may find it difficult to play a ceremonial role.  

All foreign policy experts on Obama’s team are ‘old hands’, and therefore are people who have been involved with issues that the new president will be confronted with when he assumes office on January 20, 2009. Keeping in view the complex nature of the international crises, and the fact that resolving them would certainly extend beyond 2012, very little can be expected to change in terms of the overall US foreign policy approach, aside from the pigmentation of the new president. 

In his presidential debates Obama had made it very clear that he would prefer a dialogue in dealing with Iran, but would not hesitate to use military force when it comes to dealing with the growing militant insurgency simmering in the Pakistani tribal areas. This would be an unwise policy as we have seen that a similar strategy being pursued by the present Bush administration has only served to alienate Pakistan, a non-NATO ally and an important partner in the US WOT. Pursuit of a similar policy by the new president would be a disastrous brew for the entire region from the Indus to the Bosporus.  

If ‘change’ is going to be the catch phrase for the Obama administration, then perhaps dialogue would be the right approach. Already, the Pentagon believes it needs to engage with the enemy in Afghanistan and has held a round of discussions with certain Taliban groups with the help of Saudi Arabia. With the change in the occupant of the Oval Office in January 2009, the new administration would need to take this process a step ahead and engage with all the Taliban groups, including if one may be so bold, Al-Qaeda. Such a discourse may really help ‘change’ the nature and the direction of US ‘war on terror’, as it did in the case of talks with the ‘evil empire’ during the days of the Cold War.

Such a scenario would be too much to expect considering the fact that Obama may have to rely, at least for the first one or two years of his presidency, on some of the key individuals of the current Bush administration to tackle the country's most serious challenges. At least three individuals who are likely to stay include: 

• Ben S. Bernanke, a Republican and former chairman of President Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers, who will lead the Federal Reserve for at least the first year of the new administration. The Fed chairman also serves as the economist in chief, routinely meeting with the president to offer advice and collaborating closely with the Treasury secretary. Obam has reported spoken to Bernanke several time over the phone. Although Bernanke is a Republican, his response to the financial crisis has won him plaudits from congressional Democrats who view him as pragmatic and non-ideological.

• Admiral Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who was appointed by Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and whose term expires in late 2009. Mullen shares Obama's belief in focusing more on Afghanistan but is wary of a timeline for withdrawing troops from Iraq. As Obama's chief military adviser for at least the next year, Mullen will lay out options for Iraq and Afghanistan, define the global risks the military faces, weigh the strain on the force and advise on budget priorities. Mullen can be expected to be appointed for a second term as Obama’s top military adviser.

• Robert S. Muller, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), whose term expires in 2011. Since 2001, Muller has worked to reorient the bureau toward domestic intelligence gathering and raw intelligence about terrorist movements.

Over the months of the presidential campaign, Obama made it a point of pride to seek consensus with those who do not fully agree with him. He is reported to be even considering keeping Gates at the Pentagon to ensure a smooth transition. The need to rely heavily on officials who served in the Bush administration underscores his constraints. His campaign advisers were made up of a team he personally trusted. But it seems his first years in the White House would rely heavily on officials who served in the Bush administration who may not be open to ‘change’ that Barack Hussain Obama made his campaign slogan. 

The world, especially the Muslim world, is expecting a honeymoon with Barack Hussain Obama. It may disappear with the first Obama approved air strike against an Al Qaeda position in Pakistan.

Back to Top