Editorializing under the influence.
Posted on 09/24/2009 6:08:19 PM PDT by Saije
It has been a good week for President Obama — apart from the moment when Colonel Muammar Gaddafi called him “my son”. He has won the support of Russia, and maybe China, on pressing Iran to curb its nuclear ambitions. The remarks by President Medvedev were conditional, to be sure, but solid enough that Obama could stand smiling by his side and announce his success to the world.
In opening the UN Security Council session yesterday he called for “the day when nuclear weapons have been banned”. He put this theme, toxically eccentric a few years ago, right at the top of his personal agenda.
His magical appeal to other leaders was intact. They clustered round him, Gordon Brown managing almost half a minute of face time before the superhero turned away, and a beaming David Miliband securing a handshake in the seconds before the session.
But there have been shadows. Afghanistan is a black hole — Obama barely mentioned it, and no wonder, given that he is in a quandary about whether to scrap the “surge” he announced just six months ago...He has only a handful of loose sand to show on the Middle East, even though Tony Blair said yesterday that Israeli-Palestinian talks would restart within weeks.
Most uncomfortably for Obama, while this week has reinforced foreign adoration, it has fired up with even more passion those Americans who detest him. The home front remains his toughest battleground: healthcare, then carbon emissions, then the economy again.
A President whose trademark is speeches of perfect balance, aiming to unite warring factions, is powerfully divisive within America. If he fails to overcome that, foreign policy offers a refuge. But, although many foreign leaders would continue to adore him, his influence abroad will dwindle if he cannot also succeed at home.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...
Although an utter failure as president, Obama can take some comfort in the fact that he is adored by America’s enemies overseas.
He needs to move over there then. He’s not welcomed in his own country.
Really! I have seen no statements to that effect.
ugh, my dinner just came up.
I think somebody has been hittin’ the happy smoke.
Editorializing under the influence.
Yup! Any nation that has 'em will gladly give them all up. I also believe in the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus and honest politicians.
Some of that love is going away
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8008836c-a935-11de-9b7f-00144feabdc0.html
European differences with the Obama administration threaten to overshadow Friday’s G20 summit in Pittsburgh, with Britain and France resisting US plans to overhaul the International Monetary Fund.
UK and French officials were exasperated on Thursday by US proposals that could threaten both countries’ seats on the IMF board of directors, the Financial Times has learnt. Under the US plans, the IMF board would be cut from 24 seats to 20 with fewer European representatives.
The UK and France publicly support the reweighting of the IMF’s shareholding structure to give a greater voice to the larger developing countries – including China and India – but not at the expense of their permanent board seats.
The sweep of the US proposal took Britain and France by surprise. They have argued in response that all issues about reform of the institution should be on the table, including whether the US should retain its de facto veto at the IMF.
The US believes it has already made a concession by keeping its IMF shareholding at 17 per cent, well below its share of global GDP. Since IMF board decisions require a super-majority of 85 per cent the US retains effective veto powers.
White House officials declined to comment. One European official said the US had decided not to press the matter further in Pittsburgh. But the dispute added to the growing sense of irritation between the major European countries and the Obama administration.
Angela Merkel, Germany’s chancellor, who faces a general election on Sunday, said the fight against global economic imbalances should not become the central issue at the summit – in contradiction of Barack Obama’s stated objectives.
Speaking in Berlin before boarding her flight, Ms Merkel came close to accusing the US and Britain of backtracking on financial market regulation and global limits on bankers’ bonuses by shining the spotlight on the export-oriented economic policies of Germany and China: “We should not start looking for ersatz issues and forget the topic of financial market regulation. We cannot afford to neglect this issue now.”
Ms Merkel turned on Washington, saying: “Imbalances are an issue, but we must look at all the factors...We must talk about imbalances and name the reasons why they came into being.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.