The Obama Effect Abroad
An incredulous Cliff May offers up what I guess he takes is a reductio ad absurdum argument:
Over on Contentions, Jennifer Rubin notes the column by Eugene Robinson contending that Obama’s Cairo speech led to the encouraging results in Lebanon’s elections.
I wonder: Does Robinson also believe that Obama’s visit to Buchenwald led to the right-wing victories in the European elections?
Look. Obviously the things that Barack Obama says and does are not going to be the main factor in foreign electoral outcomes. But insofar as the relationship with the United States is an important consideration for many countries, then it seems plausible to conjecture that the basic posture of the US President will have some systematic impact. In particular, it seems totally plausible to speculate that a more popular American president who engages with the views of foreigners is going to reduce the appeal of political movements that are skeptical of the United States and increase the appeal of movements that are more friendly to US influence. Both the March 14 Coalition in Lebanon and the European People’s Party fit the “more friendly to US influence” bill.
31 Responses to “The Obama Effect Abroad”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
June 9th, 2009 at 3:16 pm
Get a grip, Yglesias. The March 14ers didn’t win on account of Obama’s pretty speech.
June 9th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
I don’t think MY is saying that Obama’s speech directly influenced electoral outcomes. But then I’m not quite sure what he’s saying–that maybe Obama’s speech helped a tiny bit? Regardless, I agree that anyone who says a specific electoral outcome in a foreign country directly results from the actions of the President of the US (whether they’re talking about the “Cedar Revolution” in Lebanon some years back or the recent electoral result in that very same country) is talking out of his or her ass.*
*Unless we’re talking about countries we presently occupy, that is. I think the actions of the US President can have pretty direct effects on election results in Iraq and Afghanistan.
June 9th, 2009 at 3:22 pm
The Lebanese vote went more or less along sectarian lines. The major surprise was just how anti-hezbollah the sunni bloc was, which was reflected in their high voter turnout.
Don’t know much about the european vote, but immigration probably played a big role.
June 9th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
No, Matt’s correct. It puts the lie to “neocons” Likudniks etc who say diplomacy will only encourage the bad guys. I think it was the carrot of Obama and the stick of being turned into a Gaza.
June 9th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
There’s also the little fact that in Europe Obama’s policies – indeed those of the entire American “left” – are considered center-right.
June 9th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
But insofar as the relationship with the United States is an important consideration for many countries, then it seems plausible to conjecture that the basic posture of the US President will have some systematic impact.
It also seems plausible that there is no reason for this relationship to play an important in most foreign elections, since voters are always more concerned with national matters. Also, it seems likely that neither Cliff nor Robinson (nor Matt) knows a lot about Lebanese politics, so it is easier for them to talk about Obama and US policies instead.
Also see: Iranian elections coverage in the media.
June 9th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
At Buchenwald, did Obama give a speech calling for peace between the Axis and the Allies? Because then May’s analogy would hold.
June 9th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
In particular, it seems totally plausible to speculate that a more popular American president who engages with the views of foreigners is going to reduce the appeal of political movements that are skeptical of the United States and increase the appeal of movements that are more friendly to US influence.
Have we already forgotten how the words of George W. Bush inspired the Cedar Revolution?
Give me a break. It was ridiculous then, and it’s ridiculous now. What the US thinks is about 500th on the list of the average Lebanese voter’s concerns.
June 9th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Sounds like the Obamians won after all.
The EPP 2009 manifesto calls for:
* Creation of new jobs. Continuing reforms and investment in education, lifelong learning and employment in order to create opportunities for everyone.[4]
* Protectionism must be averted. Fiscal and monetary policies must be coordinated.[4]
* Increasing transparency and surveillance on financial markets.[4]
* Making Europe the market leader in green technology.[4]
* Increasing the share of renewable energy to at least 20% of the energy mix by 2020.[4]
* Family-friendly flexibility for working parents. Better childcare and housing must be provided, family-friendly fiscal policies introduced, and parental leave should be encouraged.[4]
* Europe should find a strategy to attract skilled workers from the rest of the world to make Europe’s economy more competitive, more dynamic and more knowledge driven.
June 9th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Oh god here we go again!
ObaBushit and his ass kissers want us to believe that all good things in the world now flow from his sacred nimbus.
Which is fine.
Really it is.
I mean it is just like the Christians who like to say Thank You Jesus! when the rug rat hits a homer.
But then it is only fair that he also accept responsibility for all the bad things on his watch as well.
Like that last minibus bomb in Iraq.
Like the baby who died in Gaza today.
And certainly like every civilian casualty anywhere American soldiers fight for their ObaFuhrer.
OK?
Otay!
As to Gordon Brown’s incompetent self immolation, is that a good thing or a bad thing?
June 9th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
Although this isn’t the focus of this post, but does anyone know anything about Jennifer Rubin? How does a person get to be so dumb?
All I can ever think of these days when I look at Contentions / Commentary Magazine is the Woody Allen joke: “I heard that Commentary and Dissent had merged and formed Dysentery.”
June 9th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
This is a very positive neocon bashing day today. First it was Frank Gaffney and now it’s Cliff May.
What’s even more amusing about Cliff May is that this was essentially his argument years ago with the, what was it again, rose, or some other flower Lebanese election with respect to the Bush doctrine.
I can’t believe these guys still get press.
June 9th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
It puts the lie to “neocons” Likudniks etc who say diplomacy will only encourage the bad guys
And it did this how? There was nothing in Obama’s speech that wasn’t said before by George W. Bush. The generic praise of Islam, the calling on Israel to stop building settlements, the hawkishness on Iran – all of it could’ve been Xeroxed from Bush circa 2006.
June 9th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
I think this is how “Reagan led to the decline of the Soviet Union” while discrediting the accomplishments of previous office holders or even the fact that he was not president when it occurred, “if it was not for Reagan those Americans would not have been released from the Islamic Republic of Iran” begins; confusing causality and effect to create a mythology.
June 9th, 2009 at 3:46 pm
False analogy. Obama’s speech in Cairo was a far more significant event and included shifts in diplomatic language, signaling change (cf., Israel, settlements).
The visit to Buchenwald was perfunctory.
So, even though Europe’s shift to “the right” leaves it miles to the left of the US ….
June 9th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
Personally, I believe without Obama’s speech we would’ve had no sunrise today. Yes Sir, Mr. Yglesias.
And now please excuse me, as I’m working hard engraving The Speech along with Obama’s Portrait on a grain of rice.
June 9th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
It’s audience concluded otherwise, by all accounts, though they remain skeptical.
Ah, I think see the problem.
June 9th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
We can still be sure Obama has a great influence over the policies of one country. Sadly, it is not always pretty:
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/06/cia_stance_on_torture_tape_docs_suggests_obamas_ne.php?ref=fpa
June 9th, 2009 at 4:02 pm
It’s highly that doubtful that Obama’s words had much affect. Hezbollah lost because they could not mobilize their sunni and druze base. Meanwhile, the U.S. based coalition was able to turn out the poor shiite communities in the south.
June 9th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
It’s audience concluded otherwise, by all accounts
Bullshit.
As soon as it was over, Alaa Sahib Abdullah, a 30-year-old lawyer, delivered his judgment: “The most important thing is to accomplish things, not just say them.”
“I am astonished of how much the media is caring about it,” he went on. “I heard such speeches by Bush more than once. There is nothing new in Obama’s speech.”
June 9th, 2009 at 4:05 pm
Ah, I think see the problem.
No, you really don’t.
June 9th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
To be a bit more blunt about it: Obama flies to Egypt, an American-sponsored dictatorship, to tell Muslims “violence and killing is wrong and it does not succeed,” even while he is bombing them in three countries, and bankrolling the military that kills and starves them in a fourth. He goes on to say that “it is a sign neither of courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children” when that’s what his military does all the time! As a punchline, he says that “America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire,” when all of these actions – including this very speech, complete with its fawning domestic coverage – are the very model of a self-interested empire. In any decent society he’d be tarred and feathered.
June 9th, 2009 at 4:41 pm
OK, that’s three minutes I’d like to have back.
Whatever.
June 9th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
Sample size: one.
I guess my use of a common expression exposed me to a very low standard of disconfirmation.
June 9th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
Sample size: one.
Read the rest of the article.
June 9th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
THE MASTER OF THE HOUSE
(THE MASTER OF THE HOUSE)
“Obama left no room for doubt,” wrote Attlia Somfalvi in Ynetnews.com. “The United States supports Israel, yet the era of trickery, promises, and the gradual annexation in Judea and Samaria is over. The time has come for action; the time has come for moving towards a resolution of the Palestinian problem… Obama’s speech was meant to make it clear to Netanyahu who the master of the house is.” (Source: RT, Russia Today).
Well, the real truth of the matter is the master of the “Empire” is Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin (BiBi) Netanyahu. After the “Dangerous Illusion Tour”, the entire failure in “diplomatic phrase making 101,” was buried deeper than Jimmy Hoffa, the never found head of the United Teamsters Union, as the next step in the Kabuki Dance was turned over to the Master of the Empire and Reality, (BiBi), and the “Two State Solution”.
(THE TWO STATE SOLUTION)
Here is how the “Two State Solution” is going to go down, one will be “The State of Israel” a sovereign Independent State, the other will be and Unarmed Palestinian Reservation State. Now, Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin (BiBi) Netanyahu, is not a novice student in geo-politics as is the Media Messiah Imperial President of the (AIE/W) American Israeli Empire-West; no (BiBi) has a (PhD.), in that subject. So, what do you do, throw the “Native American Indiana” solution back into the face of the “Empire West” White or Black Face, as the case maybe, due to the fact that the “Red Faces” are on the Reservations. The difference will be that there will be no Casinos, Slot Machines, high priced entertainment, free buffets’, or Alcohol, and NO SECURITY WITH WEAPONS, but the promise will be the same, it is your land as long as the water flows, the grass is green, and the buffalo roam, then Israel will turn off the water, the grass will wither, and the buffalo will no longer roam, and the land of the West Bank will be opened to life giving settlement, and reasonable construction, for Israeli settlers.
(THE MISSING LINK)
“To the extent that we can make peace with the Palestinians and the Israelis,” Obama told Netanyahu in Washington, “I actually think it strengthens our hand… in dealing with a potential Iranian threat…. To which no-nonsense Netanyahu responded: “There is not a policy linkage, and that’s what I hear the President saying, and that’s what I am saying too. And I have always said there is not a policy linkage between Israel and the Palestinians and… trying to deal with removing the threat of a nuclear bomb.” (Source: RT, Russia Today).
So, what does all this mean, it means that the clock is ticking on the planned Israeli preemptive Nuclear Attack upon the Shi-ite Persian Republic of Iran by years end, and the political coverage is being laid down, in preparation for that attack. NETANYAHU TZU, is a veteran and super-hawk politician, the Arabs are under his command and control, and if not under his military thumb. But, the Persians are another chapter in the book of the Greater Middle East, and one which the “Tip of the Spear” into the Islamic Crescent is going to be thrust. Once the Persians have been dealt a death blow by Israel the entire Islamic World will bend to the will of Netanyahu Tzu, making Israel the Master of the New World Order Hierarchical Structure, The Empire will control the entire of the Islamic Crescent, the Straits of Hormuz and its oil flow, the Caspian Sea Basin, the China Sea, the (IMF) International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and International Markets, the Grand Game II over and won. And, the missing Link is the preemptive nuclear attack upon Shi-ite Persian Republic of Iran, cementing the ties between the two half of the Empire, and control of the Worlds Geo-Economic Structure, and so ends the Grand Game II.
TRIATHLON
June 9th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
At least May is conceding that right-wing extremists built the concentration camps. Among contemporary conservatives, that’s a bold departure from conventional wisdom.
June 9th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
This blog has inspired a new formulation of Godwin’s law:
As the length of the thread increases, the probability that a comment will read like something from the side of a Dr Bronner’s soap container approaches one.
June 9th, 2009 at 8:53 pm
“It’s strange for me to say it, but this process of change has started because of the American invasion of Iraq. I was cynical about Iraq. But when I saw the Iraqi people voting three weeks ago, 8 million of them, it was the start of a new Arab world.”
June 10th, 2009 at 1:31 am
I too answer May’s question “yes obviously.” I live in Italy. Not surprisingly I support the relative left, since the alternative is Berlusconi. For 8 years, I have been thinking of warning Italian center leftists and leftists “You know you won’t have George Bush to kick around forever. Some day you’re going to have to win elections on your own.”
I never actually said that, because the Italian center left has such contempt for the Italian center left that I don’t want to pile on.
I also agree that the Obama effect was marginal in both Europe and Lebanon as written in the post and several comments.
June 12th, 2009 at 5:38 pm
It’s very doubtful that Obama had an effect on the Lebanese elections. You’re talking about a country whose districts are gerrymandered according to religious sect. Only a few districts had competitive elections and they were in mostly Christian areas. It’s not like Lebanon was some anti-Western nation that suddenly became moderate as a result of these elections. They ended up with the status quo – a parliament that looks very similar to the one they elected in 2005. Hezbollah has the same number of MP’s as before. The only difference is that their Christian allies were not able to garner enough seats to get a parliamentary majority (though Aoun’s FPM did gain a couple of seats). Also, March 8 did win the popular vote. I don’t really see any evidence of an Obama effect (not to mention that he speech wasn’t widely watched in Lebanon or covered in the Lebanese press).