Published on Sep 05 2009,Page 9 Lookback - Revisiting Obamamania Chintamani Mahapatra
In January, Saturday Special noted at President Obama's inauguration that he'd do well to avoid being a victim of his own hype -- we have been vindicated Barack Hussein Obama of the US created history by winning the 2008 American Presidential election. His election victory inspired the underdog in the US and various parts of the globe. His promise of change in domestic and foreign policy of world's most powerful nation raised new hopes for people everywhere, particularly Iraqis, Iranians, North Koreans, Syrians, Pakistanis, Afghans, Palestinians, Israelis --the list is endless and includes Americans and their Anglo-Saxon cousins across the Atlantic. But few at the time realised that Obama had inherited a poisoned chalice. >From the moment he entered the Oval office, a ravaging financial crisis came to haunt his nascent administration. Memories of the Great Depression of the 1930s overwhelmed the national outlook. The Great Depression fell in the inter-war period. The current financial crisis has coincided with US involvement in two wars -- one in Afghanistan and the other in Iraq. In terms of scale, intensity and devastation, the economic crisis and wars of the present day cannot be fairly compared with the Great Depression and World War II. But historical circumstances encouraged some commentators to compare Obama with Franklin D Roosevelt. But, undeniably unfairly, Obama has lost out in the scales. Barely eight months into his administration people are already saying "Obama is no FDR." Some Americans have come to see in him a second Lyndon B Johnson. At the peak of the Vietnam War, President Johnson launched a "Great Society" programme to fight poverty at home. While his domestic agenda was commendable, the cost of the war in distant Vietnam -- which he was responsible for -- created difficulties at home. President Obama came to power promising withdrawal from Iraq. But pursuing the Afghanistan campaign was high on his agenda. So he intensified the military operations in Afghanistan while simultaneously pushing an ambitious healthcare reform programme at home. He came to power riding huge popular disaffection towards the US healthcare system which is reputedly one of the worst among the advanced industrial democracies in the West. Obama was the first to articulate the fact that millions of Americans don't even have a health insurance policy. So now he wants to overhaul the healthcare system to provide insurance to all US citizens. The goal is certainly laudable, but the method of doing so has yet again sparked off debate and fierce opposition from the Republican side. Obama's intention to involve the government in providing healthcare, particularly affordable insurance to the poorer sections of society, has been welcomed by many Americans. But the Republican Party has been traditionally opposed to the concept of big government and vehemently opposes any government role in healthcare. The `Blue Dog Democrats' within Obama's Democratic Party are with the Republicans. Corporate America is opposed to the President's plan for obvious reasons. The Obama administration's approach to these challenges is responsible for growing disappointment in the US over the inability of the White House to come up with credible and acceptable solutions. Less than 50 per cent of the people now feel that Obama is doing a good job in office. Popular displeasure with President Obama's performances are varied and many. To start with, many Americans have not approved of the administration's policy of bailing out the corrupt financial companies, some of which have already started issuing huge bonuses. Though Obama repeatedly declared a `forward looking' policy, his intention to start a criminal probe of abuse cases involving the CIA's mistreatment of terror suspects is interpreted as returning to the national security legacy, George W Bush. Senior citizens in the country are worried that Obama's $1 trillion healthcare proposal in the midst of a recession would mean reduction of medicare benefits. President Obama's abilities as a sound administrator and visionary reformer are being questioned in view of the delay in filling up top, policy making positions. The US Senate, with a Democratic majority, has so far confirmed only 43 per cent of more than 500 senior positions. According to a New York Times commentator, "Mr Obama does not have his own people enacting programmes central to his mission. He is trying to fix the financial markets but does not have an assistant treasury secretary. He is fighting two wars but does not have an Army secretary. He sent Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to Africa to talk about international development but does not have anyone running the Agency for International Development. He has invited major powers to a summit on nuclear nonproliferation but does not have an assistant secretary of state for nonproliferation." Many Americans are of the opinion that the President is spending huge amount of money on family vacations when the country is undergoing an economic crisis. The farm that the Obamas recently rented in Martha's Vineyard for a week's vacation cost $35, 000 to the taxpayer. Actually Obama is spending more money on transportation than any President since Dwight D Eisenhower. The `Progressives', another solid political base of Barrack Obama, are increasingly upset with the administration's priorities and approaches on a broad range of issues, including his `public option' for health insurance proposal. The President's job rating and unpopularity are not confined to domestic issues alone. Many Americans have begun to compare the Afghanistan war with the Vietnam experience. Certainly there are several differences between the two, but the fact remains that more than half of the country's population now think that the Afghanistan war is going badly for the country. There are suggestions from certain quarters that the President should give a timeline for withdrawing troops. But Obama is arguing that Afghanistan is a "war of necessity". He also sought to raise classical fears about another al-Qaeda attack on the US. Moreover, Obama would have to bear some responsibility for the instability in Iraq that may follow after US troop withdrawal. Undoubtedly Iraq would be a more divided nation than it was before 2003. On Iran and North Korea, Obama's lack of enthusiasm for finding a resolution through either negotiation or adoption of tough postures is reducing his image. Last, but not least, Darfur activists have expressed their disappointment at the President's perceived reneging on his promises. He had declared Sudan as a 'priority' for his administration during the campaign, but has not moved since the inauguration to act on it. Will Obama succeed in his mission to profoundly redefine American governance? Polls are nothing compared to real electoral feedback. Next year's Congressional elections may be the touchstone. As of now, the future does not seem very bright for America's first 21st century superhero. (The writer is Professor of American Studies at JNU) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
