Obama is America's President, Not the World's

In a recent poll, the United States emerged as the “most admired country” on the planet, thanks to the rock star popularity of new president Barack Obama. But Obama’s popularity still has not translated into foreign policy wins for the United States.

David Frum recently commented on FF about the Roper NBI (National Brand Index) poll in which the United States has suddenly emerged in 2009 as the “most admired country” on the planet.  Apparently, we have vaulted from seventh place to overtake France, Germany, England and Japan to the number one slot.  The report states that this is due to the rock star popularity of new president Barack Obama.  This certainly would seem to be the case as no one can deny Obama’s personal popularity as a transcendent figure around the world.  To much of the globe, his election symbolizes the possibilities that exist within the USA which allow one to rise to the very pinnacle of power and prestige, regardless of one’s circumstances.  On the face of it this poll’s result should give us awarmy-fuzzy feeling.

But, as Frum points out, these numbers reveal a fickle attitude that as he says could very easily shift the other way in a fortnight.  And certainly, the goal of a president should not be that the rest of the kids on the block like us.  As a means to an end that works in our country’s favor on some policy initiative, sure.  But if being popular on the world’s streets is the end in and of itself, this poses a problem.  Especially given that such popularity can evaporate with another election cycle that the world finds objectionable.

For the sake of argument, however, let us assume that Frum is mistaken and that this new pro-USA attitude is more solid than we think.  Still, I ask the fundamental question:  does it really matter much that the people of the world (those polled at least) “admire” the USA?  And who is doing the admiring?  Maybe we need not be gratified, but rather concerned by this new-found adoration and ask ourselves what does it mean?

Well, we have seen in the past nine months of the Obama presidency what it does NOT mean.  It does not mean that Obama’s popularity - that has showered down upon the rest of us mere mortal Americans - has translated into foreign policy victories for the United States.  Oh sure, foreign leaders will fawn over America’s media “celebsident,”  jostling and nudging each other to get their beaming faces in the photograph with him at the latest economic summit, climate change roundtable, or old fashioned America-bashing that he’s got down to a science.  But when the mikes are turned off, the cameras stowed away, the dinner plates cleared, and the leaders disappear into the conference room and roll up their shirt or blouse sleeves for some serious negotiations, the United States, that now most beloved of nations, tends to walk away empty-handed.  This despite Mr. Obama’s personality... or perhaps even more disconcerting, because of it!

Consider this disconnect between being well-liked and being an effective statesman. Mr. Obama may harbor a belief that there is no problem that cannot be thawed by the warmth of his charm, the record would dictate otherwise.  George Will laid it out nicely this weekend:

• He has asked Israel stop expanding the settlements… they didn’t.
• He asked the Palestinians to engage the Israelis… they didn’t.
• He suggested to Saudi Arabia some gesture towards Israel… they didn’t.
• He said to Iran do this that and the other thing… they haven’t.
• He said to Honduras please restore your president… they didn’t.
• He said to India and China please restrain your greenhouse gasses… they won’t.
• He asked NATO to please take some of our Gitmo terrorists… they won’t.
• He asked NATO to please send more troops to Afghanistan… they won’t.

As Mr. Will summed it: “The world adores him and ignores him.”

Unfortunately, then, we have the opposite of what we need in a world leader and standard-bearer.  I think when it comes to foreign relations, it is better to be respected than liked.  And no, they are not the same.  Especially in the realm of foreign affairs where national interests trump all – as Mr. Obama discovered yet again at the hands of the IOC last week.    You can possibly have both respect and adoration.  We have had it once or twice before, especially in the aftermath of World War II. But in a world that will always gravitate, in the end, towards its own self-interests, you must have the former or face diminishment abroad.  And so there will be times when as president, one will actually have to make a decision that the world will not agree with, but is in your own country’s best interest nonetheless.  As much of Europe lurches relentlessly towards a pan-Islamic caliphate in the next half century, the USA will be ever more at odds with nations that were once traditional allies but will have have become different countries altogether.  When a world that is positioned to be ever more hostile to our interests suddenly approves of the direction we are headed in, it may be time to take a step back and reassess if this is such a good thing.  And so Barack Obama - and his successors - must always remember the core covenant made with the American people when assuming the highest office in our land.  That he was elected President of the United States of America, not the world.  And as such he must always place our national interests first and foremost... even at the expense of getting knocked down a few rankings in the next NBI poll.  Based on what I know of the history of nations, I’ll take being respected over being liked any time.  And based on what I've seen so far, I wonder if President Obama even knows the difference.