11/05/2008
Europe's Wish List
In conversations and e-mail exchanges with SPIEGEL ONLINE, European leaders
and thinkers express their wishes for US President-elect Barack Obama. Yes,
they want the US to join the Kyoto successor. And, yes, they want to see
Guantanamo close. But many also know that theirs is a view from Mars.
Part 1: Europe's Wish List
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,588190,00.html
Part 2: 'We Need the US as a Strong Partner'
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,588190-2,00.html
Part 3: 'On Iran, Precious Time Has Been Lost'
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,588190-3,00.html
Part 4: 'We Need a Washington Less Ideological in Dealing with Russia and
China'
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,588190-4,00.html
Part 5: 'The Time Has Come to Kick-Start Talks with Tehran'
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,588190-5,00.html
Part 6: 'Some Disappointment Is Inevitable'
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,588190-6,00.html
Part 7: 'By Voting for Obama, Americans Are not Voting to Become an EU
Country'
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,588190-7,00.html
Part 8: 'Please Don't Bomb Iran'
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,588190-8,00.html
Part 9: 'A Measure of Moral Leadership Would Be to Join the ICC'
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,588190-9,00.html
Part 10: 'Obama -- Something that Is Still Impossible to Achieve in many
European Countries'
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,588190-10,00.html
Part 1: Europe's Wish List
Margot Wallström of Sweden is the vice-president of the European Commission,
the European Union's executive.
On Tuesday the American people cast their votes electing a new President of
the United States. I believe we are entering into a new era of trans-Atlantic
relations.
In these times of extreme financial instability, it is more important than
ever to strengthen trans-Atlantic relations and work together to solve global
problems. Europe and the US share the same goals and values. We both want a
peaceful, prosperous and stable world, where democracy is the norm, the rule
of law prevails and human rights are respected.
Even more importantly, the biggest concerns facing us today are of a global
nature. The financial crisis, climate change, security, the fight against
poverty, hunger and disease in the developing world are all challenges that
neither Europe nor the US can take on single-handed.
In order to stop the effects of climate change, developed countries must lead
by good example. This is why EU leaders have committed themselves to cutting
carbon emissions by 20 percent by 2020. If there is international agreement,
the EU will deepen this cut to 30 percent. The EU is also committed to
cutting energy consumption by 20 percent, with the aim of becoming the
world's most energy-efficient region. I urge the US to take similar steps,
working together with the EU on cutting emissions drastically and developing
new energy technologies that generate smart, sustainable growth. I invite the
new US president to take a leading role in paving the way for a global
agreement on climate change in 2009.
Finally, the US has been particularly successful in creating growth and jobs,
and maintaining competitiveness through technological innovation rather than
low labor costs. The EU on the other hand has brought forward an ambitious
climate change package and works hard to promote social justice. As we have
seen in Scandinavia -- where the concept of the flexicurity seems to have
been born -- it is possible to combine economic growth with social justice.
This involves promoting the well-being of the whole society and tackling
injustices such as gender inequality, which manifests itself the most clearly
in the pay gap between men and women. In the US, men earn 20 percent more
money for the same job as women; in Europe, this figure amounts to 15 percent
on average.
I believe the era of US unilateralism is over, and that partnership with
Europe has become a central plank of US foreign policy. In this light, I
invite the new US president to join the EU in shaping the future we all want
-- a stable, peaceful and increasingly prosperous world. A world where
development is sustainable and in which democracy is not imposed but
nurtured.
Slavenka Drakulic, a native of Croatia, is the best-selling author of "Cafe
Europa."
A View from Mars: I am afraid that we Europeans tend to attribute too much
personal power to the president of the United States. We might as well be
Martians for all that we demand of the new president. We would like him
(especially if it is our favorite Barack Obama) to: stop the war in Iraq,
divert funding from the military industrial complex and use it to improve the
lives of the poor, introduce national health insurance, sit down with Putin
and discuss how best to bring peace to the world, persuade China and India to
restrict dangerous gas emissions, get rid of the Taliban in Afghanistan, make
a deal with Iran, sign the Kyoto Protocol, catch Osama bin Laden and,
finally, bring peace to the Israel-Palestine conflict. Of course, all of this
should be accomplished in close collaboration with European governments --
and all in the first year, possibly in the first days of his presidency.
Being Martians, we can't see that the job suffers from obvious limitations
and that no president is in a position, all by himself, to bring about
substantial changes either in politics or in the economy. He is not a Santa
Claus. Besides, Martians like to overlook the fact that even Obama would
continue to see America as the most powerful nation in the world, and would
not be likely to show much more respect for the United Nations or to deny
himself a military option for dealing with Iran. Let's not forget that he is
pro-death penalty and against gun control -- two things that, looking down
from Mars, should make him considerably less popular. But again, who would
bother to look at details from so far away? In regard to finances, we are
again speaking about nuances, not reforms (a word that American candidates
often use, but with a different meaning than is common on Mars). Whether the
winner is McCain or Obama, it was the globalization of deregulated capitalism
that caused the crash in the first place. We should expect the system will
proceed as greedily as ever, even if it is tamed for a while. The president
is not to blame. Nowadays politicians and governments mainly serve the
interests of the big money, not the people. It is, after all, big money that
makes or breaks an American president, in spite of what Americans or Martians
believe to be true.
Still, even small changes in the right direction are important, although one
can't really see that from Mars either. Under such conditions, can a single
person really make a significant change? Yes, Barack Obama could -- but
primarily on a symbolic level. It would be fantastic for Americans to have
the first African-American president in their history. This would change the
world's psychological landscape. It remains to be seen, however, if it will
really make a difference for Europe, or for the rest of the world.
Part 2: 'We Need the US as a Strong Partner'
Stavros Dimas, a native of Greece, is the European Commissioner for the
Environment.
The European Union has been waiting for a long time for America to join us in
taking serious action to address the world's environmental challenges.
The need has never been greater. The world is facing a double environmental
crisis involving accelerating climate change and unprecedented loss of
biodiversity. Yet the US has ratified neither the Kyoto Protocol nor the
international Convention on Biodiversity.
The US elections come at a crucial time. For climate change, 2009 is the
final year of negotiations that should culminate in agreement on a
strengthened multilateral climate change regime for the period after 2012. We
need the new US administration to seize the opportunity and position itself
on the side of the global environment.
Certainly there has been some cause for optimism. Both presidential
candidates have been on record as saying they support mandatory reductions
that would cut greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. This is a
start, though it falls far short of what is needed to tackle climate change
seriously. Both have also come out in favour of "cap and trade" systems like
Europe's emissions trading system as an important part of the solution. This
is a significant and positive change.
Above all we need to break the vicious circle whereby the US on the one hand
and the major emerging economies on the other refuse to take action unless
the other moves first. It is time for the US to show leadership on this.
The developed world not only bears the greatest historic responsibility for
climate change but also possesses the financial and technological means to
tackle it. We in the EU have shown our determination by committing to cut our
emissions by at least 20 percent of 1990 levels by 2020. We will increase
this cut to 30 percent if our partners in the developed world commit to
making comparable reductions.
To prevent the worst consequences of climate change the world will need to
lower total emissions by at least half of their 1990 levels by 2050. To
achieve that we have to move fast: Global emissions need to peak within the
next 10 to 15 years. This can only be achieved if the US and the major
emerging economies join the EU in taking bold action.
Eckart von Klaeden is the foreign policy spokesman in the parliamentary group
of Germany's conservative Christian Democratic Union/Christian Social Union
parties.
No matter whom the American voters elect on Tuesday, a radical change in
Washington's foreign policy towards its European allies is unlikely. Both
John McCain and Barack Obama would generally continue to follow the
multilateral course pursued by President Bush in his second term and
President Clinton before him. Both will, if elected, seek to further
intensify trans-Atlantic relations. The new president will give Europe
greater opportunities to participate, without, however, abandoning America's
claim to leadership. But this also means that the European side will be
expected to contribute more than in the past. There is a real need for this,
whether in policy towards Russia or Iran, regarding climate protection and
energy security, in the Middle East or Afghanistan. If, in the words of the
German government's coalition agreement, we are committed to "effective
multilateralism," then the United States must be willing to take a
multilateral approach, but we must also be willing to take effective action.
Fears, however, that one of the first decisions taken by the new president
will be to call for more German troops in Afghanistan are exaggerated and
indicate a lack of self-confidence. We should seize this opportunity for
closer cooperation, because we need the United States to be a strong partner
-- but the US also needs us Europeans as a strong partner.
Although US power is likely to decline in relative terms in view of the rise
of emerging countries, primarily in Asia, the United States will remain the
leading Western power and force for international stability for a long time
to come. Its military dominance will continue in the coming decades. Despite
the current financial crisis, the US economy will continue to lead the world
for many years to come due to its great potential for innovation. Despite the
structural changes in the international system following the end of the Cold
War, there are no two regions in the world which have so much in common as
Europe and the US and which enjoy such close political, economic, cultural,
strategic and historical links. The trans-Atlantic partnership is also
important for purely pragmatic reasons, since the strengths of both partners
complement each other well.
Although the EU is prosperous and holds a powerful attraction for its
neighbors, it is not yet a genuine strategic actor on the world stage.
Strategic operations such as the current operation in Afghanistan can only be
carried out under US leadership or within the framework of NATO. However,
since the fiasco experienced by the US in the first few years following the
Iraq war, it has become increasingly clear that the US cannot forgo the
legitimacy and support provided by the major European nations. This is all
the more true given that Europe enjoys a higher standing than the US in
certain regions of the world, and involving Europe significantly increases
the chances of joint success -- in the Middle East, for example. The EU
possesses significant resources and expertise in the field of civilian crisis
management and reconstruction. The current situation in Afghanistan and the
Balkans, in particular, makes clear the importance of linking military and
civilian measures. Trans-Atlantic cooperation should not, however, be limited
to Europe and the United States; other democratic and like-minded countries
should also be involved, such as Japan and India, Australia and New Zealand,
Brazil and Mexico.
Robert Badinter, 80, is a French senator and member of the foreign affairs
and defense committees who, as justice minister under President Mitterrand,
achieved the abolition of the death penalty.
My expectation of the new president is that he:
1. Withdraw US forces from Iraq;
2. Close the prison at Guantanamo and give all inmates the rights to which
they are entitled under US law;
3. Through his emphatic support he must achieve a just peace between Israel
and the Palestinians;
4. Take an energetic approach to the fight against climate change and ratify
the Kyoto Protocol;
5. Support the International Criminal Court;
6. Appoint independent and progressive judges to the US Supreme Court.
Part 3: 'On Iran, Precious Time Has Been Lost'
Hans Blix was head of the International Atomic Energy Agency from 1981 to
1997 following a stint as foreign minister of Sweden. In the three years
leading up to the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq, he was in charge of searching
for weapons of mass destruction in the country.
The global financial system has been rocked by the recent crisis and Mr.
Obama will have to bring about early discussions about a broader agenda and
broader participation in the institutions for international financial
cooperation like the IMF and the G-8. During a global recession he will have
to resist protectionist pressures from important groups who supported him.
Obama should be able to use the strong public opinion in the US to make the
country help frame drastic global policies against dangerous climate change
and environmental destruction. Technological innovation should be promoted,
like fuel cells for cars. Energy must be generated more efficiently and used
less wastefully. Obama should stimulate the use of effective renewable
sources and overcome any hesitation against a rapid expansion of nuclear
power.
In international affairs, Obama will have to steer away from the arrogant
unilateralism of the Bush years and explain to the public that the
interdependence of states and peoples is fast accelerating. In this modern
world a constructive use of multilateral institutions like the UN is a
necessity. They are indispensable mechanisms where reconciliation of
interests can take place and joint action can be organized.
Obama was ridiculed by his opponents for saying that he was ready to talk
with adversaries. He was right and his administration should act on this
principle. To talk is not to concede. The Bush administration has had a
tendency to talk to others rather than with others. The worst example has
been the demand that Iran must suspend its program for the enrichment of
uranium before the US will sit down for direct discussions.
When it comes to US withdrawal from Iraq, Obama should take the stance that
no US troops should stay longer than the host government wishes. The Bush
administration, while intending to withdraw the bulk of US forces, has
clearly wanted to retain some US troops in less visible bases. The aim seems
to be more to protect US interests in Iraqi oil and to have springboards for
possible actions against Iran than to protect Iraq.
For Obama, Iraq was the "dumb" war and Afganistan -- where 9/11 was planned
-- was the place where all resources should have been projected. He wants a
surge in Afganistan but there is a risk that the opportunity for success has
already been lost and that American and other foreign troops are now seen
more as foreign than as liberators. To abandon the country to renewed
medieval style rule is not a possible American policy, but reconciliation
with and involvement by parts of the Taliban might be a possibility. Iran and
Russia could provide important help if the US can relax relations with these
countries.
On Iran, precious time has been lost during which the country has moved
closer to a capability to make bomb grade material. Rather than humiliating
Iran by declaring -- as if to a child -- that "Iran should behave itself,"
the US should seek to identify and remove the incentives Iran may have to
enrich uranium. To forego enrichment, Iran needs iron-clad assurances of
supply of uranium fuel for its nuclear power program. Although Iran is no
longer threatened by neighboring Iraq, it still feels threatened by the US.
Washington should be ready to offer Iran security guarantees and diplomatic
relations if the country abandons the option to make bomb grade material.
Obama has rightly endorsed the call by a large number of foreign policy
experts led by George Shultz, Henry Kissinger, Sam Nunn and William Perry for
the US to take the initiative in nuclear disarmament. In 2007 the world spent
$1.3 trillion (€1 trillion) on military expenses -- about half of this
expense came from the US budget. Taming the military-industrial complex is
difficult in any country but starting a new era of international disarmament
could help Mr. Obama to move huge sums from arms to health care, social
welfare and education.
Early US ratification of the comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty would send
a dramatic signal that an era of global disarmament has begun. Preventing
non-proliferation will be less difficult in a world in which those states
possessing nuclear weapon states renounce the license they have given
themselves up till now.
Marianne Heuwagen is director of the Germany office of Human Rights Watch.
The next president will take office at a time when the credibility and
effectiveness of the United States in combating human rights abuses abroad
has been badly eroded by the Bush administration. There is an urgent need to
remedy abuses on many fronts, four are crucial.
1. The new American government has to ensure that US counter-terrorism
efforts comply with International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law. As first
steps, the next president should close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility
and prosecute those detainees implicated in terrorism in regular federal
courts rather than before military commissions and send the others to their
home countries or appropriate countries of resettlement, including the United
States. The new government should issue an executive order to implement the
bans on torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment by requiring the
CIA to abide by the interrogation rules that the US military has now adopted.
Further, it should put an end to the CIA's secret detention program and stop
renditions of terrorism suspects and others to countries where they are at
risk of torture or ill-treatment.
2. The new government should make human rights a central pillar of its
foreign policy.
3. The next administration should rejoin the international human rights
community. The US government has remained an international outcast by failing
to ratify important and long-standing human rights treaties and has
repudiated, rather than worked with, allies to improve the UN Human Rights
Council. As immediate steps, the next administration should seek a seat on
the UN Human Rights Council and work to make it more effective. It should
support investigations and prosecutions by the International Criminal Court
(ICC), seek to repeal the American Service-Members' Protection Act of 2002
and begin steps to join the Rome Statute of the ICC. It should also bring US
policy in line with the 2008 treaty to ban cluster munitions, urge the Senate
to ratify both the Cluster Munitions Treaty and the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty as
soon as possible. It should further urge the Senate to ratify key human
rights treaties that are broadly accepted by the international community.
4. The new US government should abolish the federal death penalty, declare an
immediate moratorium on federal executions, and direct the Attorney General
not to seek the death penalty in federal prosecutions. It should mitigate
some of the most inhumane aspects of current US immigration policy by
encouraging Congress to amend US law requiring the immediate deportation of
any immigrant with a criminal conviction by restoring individualized
deportation hearings in which an immigration judge can weigh the offense's
seriousness against the harm caused by deportation. It should further address
the stark and persistent racial disparities plaguing the US criminal justice
system.
Elmar Brok is a member of the German parliament with the conservative
Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and an expert on foreign policy in the
European Parliament.
I would like to see a US president who can look beyond the brim of his
Stetson, making a true trans-Atlantic community possible, complete with joint
strategic debates and decisions, as well as one who reestablishes the
value-oriented credibility of the West.
Part 4: 'We Need a Washington Less Ideological in Dealing with Russia and
China'
Thierry de Montbrial is director of the French Institute of International
Relations and the author of "Twenty Years that Turned the World Upside Down
-- From Berlin to Beijing."
First, I would like to see a more congenial president, one who takes a
friendlier approach to the rest of the world. Of course, we need a leader
who, in light of the financial crisis, proves to be effective on economic
issues and does not fall prey to the temptation of protectionism. Politically
speaking, he must be a man who thinks beyond narrow American interests. More
concretely: damage control must continue in Iraq, and there must be a
coordinated approach with Pakistan and dialogue with Iran -- without it,
there can be no solution in the Middle East or in Afghanistan. Finally, the
new man in Washington must show himself to be less ideological when dealing
with Russia and China, particularly regarding issues such as the expansion of
NATO and the missile shield. Planetary problems cannot be resolved through
confrontation.
Jan Techau is the head of the Alfred von Oppenheim Center for European
Studies at the German Council on Foreign Relations.
The first issue to be tackled by the next president is hardly ever found on
any of the laundry lists which are currently being compiled for the next
trans-Atlantic agenda: style. The manner in which the future American
administration will treat its European counterparts will be all-important for
constructive relations during the next four years. Europeans do not expect to
find agreement on all policy issues with the US. Far from it -- Europe itself
finds it soberingly difficult to generate much-needed pan-EU unity, even on
urgent policy issues. But Europeans expect to be treated without
condescension and as nominally equal counterparts, even if it is true that
the power imbalance between themselves and the US is sometimes strikingly
evident. In other words: a return to normal and established ways of diplomacy
is much anticipated -- and much needed. The new president could score easy
points and make a huge difference by exercising old-fashioned, respectful
leadership.
Still, when looking at the issues, contrary to what the current election hype
makes us believe, the quality of future trans-Atlantic relations actually
depends much more on the Europeans than on who will be the next US president.
Because regardless of the outcome of the elections, daunting tasks need to be
tackled by the partners, and it is the Europeans who have so far not lived up
to their capacities. Both Afghanistan, and, even more importantly, Iran, fall
into this category. Hopefully, the Europeans will have good answers and some
new substance to offer when the new president asks difficult questions.
Even before the financial crisis, the trans-Atlantic partners were forced to
think hard about how to manage their relatively weaker position in world
affairs. With a global financial crisis probably leading to global recession,
this is more urgent than ever. The institutions once created by a dominant
West to safeguard global stability and development -- i.e. the United
Nations, the IMF, the World Bank, NATO (and to a lesser extent the EU) -- are
in need of major overhauls. Their new shapes will mirror a changed world,
with emerging economies and many developing nations claiming a bigger share
of the pie. Europe and America must propose creative and workable
alternatives to save these institutions and to retain its influence.
Soli Özel is a professor of political science and international relations at
Istanbul's Bilgi University.
I rejoice at Obama's election, but we must be careful not to over-invest in
him. Expectations for Obama are already too high. No one can meet them. As
far as international relations are concerned, anything that is non-Bush will
obviously be welcomed by the rest of the world. But the United States is
still the United States, and one man can't change the whole machinery of US
government.
One of the things Obama will have to contend with is the fixation Americans
have with the idea of American exceptionalism. This philosophy -- that
everyone is the world must toe the American line -- was extreme under Bush.
Some humility and capacity for dialogue would be good. I think Obama has the
personal character to pursue policy in this way, but it remains to be seen
whether he will manage to bring along with him the entire machinery of
American foreign policy.
Will the United States under Obama accept a reshuffling of the power
distribution that structures the UN Security Council, the World Bank and the
IMF? Will the US accept that while they might be primus inter pares, they are
no longer a world hegemon? Here I think we might be disappointed.
Turkey will be important for the United States no matter who comes to power,
and Turkish-US relations will need to be well managed. I think Obama will be
better for the world, and also better for Turkey. Some in Turkey have pointed
to Obama's support for the US Congress's Armenian Genocide Resolution and
have suggested that McCain, who opposes the resolution, would actually be a
better friend to Turkey. I disagree. Obama has people around him who know
Turkey very well, and I believe he'll prove to be a good partner for Turkey.
I wonder if he is going to be able to seriously tackle the
Israeli-Palestinian issue. He won't necessarily have a stronger hand there
than previous administrations, but it does seem to me there is increasing
realization in Israel that time is running out. On the other hand, the
Israeli right-wing is more entrenched than ever. We'll see.
Achim Berg is CEO of Microsoft Germany.
No matter who the next American president is, I would like to see, most of
all, the new US government hit the ground running! The world's strongest
economic power needs a rapid transition and must approach the challenges of
the financial crisis in a determined way. At a time when new decisions will
have to be made on a daily basis, a president will not have the luxury of 100
days to become acclimated to the job. In addition, I hope that the already
positive trans-Atlantic relations are strengthened. This relates not only to
economic issues, but also to questions of security policy and the
environment, which can only be overcome with concerted action. And then there
is something else: As a German employee of an American company that has been
established in Germany for 25 years, I believe that the US government can
learn a thing or do from Germany and Europe. The area of data protection
would be an exciting topic in this regard.
Part 5: 'The Time Has Come to Kick-Start Talks with Tehran'
Pawel Swieboda is Founder and Director of demosEUROPA, a Polish think tank.
The key task facing the new US President will be to share power and influence
with other key players around the world in a manner which preserves American
leadership. The decline of the US's position in the world is a fact of life.
However, statistics never tell the whole story. Washington continues to pull
the strings on a range of issues from science and innovation to nuclear
non-proliferation. The American civilization remains singularly attractive to
other nations and peoples around the world.
If the new president manages to build an inclusive international order in
which key players feel comfortable, he will find it easier to exercise
leadership. An early test of his strategy will come with the triple challenge
of climate change, trade and new financial regulations. If he is to win on
all three issues, he will have to both invite others to share in the benefits
and to assume resonsibilities himself. On limiting greenhouse gas emissions,
he will need to convince China of the merits of a low carbon economy. On
trade, he will need to put an end to the schism between the developed and
developing world which led to the failure of the Doha round. Finally,
regarding new financial regulations, he will need to invite others to the
table at the US- and EU-dominated IMF or its successor and ensure that it
becomes a first responder against global turbulence.
The EU-US relationship will need to overcome its Freudian proclivity for the
"narcissism of minor differences" if it is to be successful. Given the
challenge posed by other world powers, there is no doubt that the EU and the
US will need to rely on each other more than ever. Global competition will
push them to create a single trans-Atlantic market in the next decade. This
flagship project will unveil new energies but will never lead to perfect
harmony.
Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, a former Danish prime minister, is president of the
Party of European Socialists in the European Parliament.
Obama promises to renew American diplomacy, and to talk to foes as well as
friends. This would make an enormous difference.
There are so many issues which need to be tackled, but one which I believe is
very important is reform of the international financial markets. I have had
many meetings with the US Democrats about what needs to be done and I am sure
we can work together on new joint regulation of financial markets, and that
we can reach a common position on new roles for the IMF and other global
financial institutions. The Democrats have the same wish as us -- financial
markets that sustain jobs in modern industries instead of seeking excessive
short-term profits at the expense of other priorities.
Obama has one huge advantage over Bush -- he does not see the world only as a
security problem. He knows there are other equally pressing issues: climate,
energy, poverty, disease, peace -- some of them part of the root causes of
terror.
A US president who showed commitment to the well-being of ordinary citizens
would generate renewed interest in social justice worldwide. Where Bush cut
social spending and gave tax cuts to the super rich, Obama's Plan for America
offers clear commitments to widen healthcare, tackle poverty and improve
education for all. It would be good not only for the workers of America but
also for social democracy in Europe and elsewhere. America could inspire
people throughout the world in a way it has not done since the civil rights
movement.
Obama's message of change brings hope. A new, young, gifted president
offering the possibility of a new dialogue on the world's problems. We should
welcome it with open arms.
Denis MacShane, 60, is Great Britain's former minister of state for Europe
and a Labour Party member of parliament.
First of all, I would like to modify the words of John F. Kennedy: We should
not ask ourselves what the United States can do for Europe. Instead, we
should ask ourselves what the EU can do for a functioning partnership with
America. Europe needs more coordination. The Europeans must make a stronger
effort to speak with one voice when it comes to security policy. Only then
can the EU gain greater influence in Washington. Conversely, of course, we
would like to see the new president remain in a dialogue with the world. An
isolationist, inward-looking, protectionist America would leave the world at
the disposal of the new powers and ideologies, which have nothing but
contempt for democracy, freedom of opinion and human rights, especially the
rights of women. But if the leaders in Europe and America live up to the
challenge, the Euro-Atlantic alliance, together with the democracies in Asia
and Latin America, will be able to shape the 21st century.
Constanze Stelzenmüller is director of the Berlin office of the German
Marshall Fund.
Dear Mr. President, congratulations! You are now the most powerful man in a
globalized world. Even though we cannot vote for you, somehow this also makes
you the president of us all. That's why the entire world has such high hopes
for you. We, on the other hand, know that before your election, entire teams
have been developing wish lists that you will be taking along on your first
trips abroad. There are plenty of issues to discuss: the financial crisis,
climate change, Afghanistan, Iraq ... Doesn't this mean that you will
confront a mountain of expectations? For this reason, I do have one final
request: Take it easy, Mr. President. Take your time, travel, talk to
America's allies and listen before you act. This will make negotiating items
on other people's wish lists (somewhat) easier.
Part 6: 'Some Disappointment Is Inevitable'
Wolfgang Ischinger is a former German Ambassador to the United States and is
chairman of the Munich Security Conference.
The most positive consequence of the election -- and the most necessary one
-- is the opportunity for not just the United States, but for the entire West
to regain the moral high ground in international affairs. Moral leadership is
what we have most dramatically lost during the Bush years, and we must
dramatically regain it.
I do worry that many Germans and other Europeans have developed
unrealistically high expectations for an Obama administration. In some of the
panels I've been participating in recently, you get the sense that everyone
expects a trans-Atlantic paradise will emerge with blue skies and constant
sunshine. Some disappointment is inevitable.
We know that on many issues there is an obvious, visible divergence of
interests across the Atlantic. Europeans will be surprised, for instance, to
learn that even with Obama in the White House and a strong Democratic
majority in the US Senate, the US is unlikely to ratify the Kyoto protocol or
its successor arrangements as they currently exist.
On the other hand, the high expectations people have for Obama are a sign of
something healthy. Europeans clearly hope for better relations with the US.
The new administration could be an antidote for the anti-Americanism that
we've seen rise in recent years.
The advent of the next administration presents us with a historic opportunity
to turn the page and recognize the trans-Atlantic partnership for what it is:
the most important partnership in the world -- politically, economically, and
militarily.
There are two issues in particular that I hope the new administration tackles
early on. The next US president needs to seize the opportunity to rebuild a
more effective and meaningful relationship with Russia. In my view, there has
not been nearly enough discussion on a huge number of issues between Moscow
and Washington. Reopening dialogue with Russia could also help change the
climate between the US and the EU.
The other top issue on my list is Iran. The time has come to kick-start
direct talks between Washington and Tehran. If we want to make progress in
that part of the world, particularly regarding nuclear proliferation, we need
to engage in direct and comprehensive dialogue, which has been lacking ever
since 1979.
Jose Bové, 55, is a French farmer and trade unionist, anti-globalization
activist and a pioneering radical opponent of the cultivation of genetically
manipulated grain and vegetable crops.
My wish for the new president focuses on two key issues: To finally arrange
for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq and a clear and decisive commitment to
climate and the environment. An area in which the United States has a lot of
catching up to do.
Reidar Visser is editor of the Iraq-focused Web site www.historiae.org and a
research fellow at the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs.
When it comes to Iraq policy, the hope is that the new president will adopt a
policy that is radically different from what until now has been mainstream
thinking among both Republicans and Democrats.
The problem with the Bush administration's policy in Iraq has been that it
focuses almost exclusively on the military dimension and thereby fails to put
pressure on the Iraqi government to undertake any reforms that would move it
towards a more inclusive system of government. To the Iraqi government,
American support has been like a blank check that has enabled it to become
stronger while at the same time resisting pressures for political reform.
Republicans realize that most Iraqis want a united country, but they do not
have the right policy to back it up.
The problem with the Democratic Party's policy in Iraq so far is that it
either focuses on withdrawal exclusively (with little regard for what might
happen to the country in the aftermath of withdrawal), or that it combines
withdrawal with visions of political settlement that have no resonance with
the Iraqis themselves. A Dayton-style agreement involving Iraq's neighbors
and based on federalism as a key principle is unlikely to succeed. Democrats
fail to realize that among the Iraqis, only the Kurds are genuinely
interested in federalism on an ethnic basis, and the majority of the Shiites
do not want Iran to negotiate on their behalf.
The hope is that the next US president will realize that American interests
in the region are best served by a stable Iraq, and that a stable Iraq
requires a political system that is supported by the country's inhabitants.
The best way of achieving this is a radical revision of the 2005
constitution. However, this is not a process that the United States should
seek to micro-manage. Rather, it should focus on its role as a facilitator,
and single out free and fair parliamentary elections in 2009 as its top
priority. The Iraqis deserve one last chance to fix their own system before
the American forces depart.
Part 7: 'By Voting for Obama, Americans Are not Voting to Become an EU
Country'
Volker Perthes is the head of the German Institute for International and
Security Affairs in Berlin.
This election will bring change, regardless of the winner. Both candidates
expressed their wish to cooperate with Europeans more than their predecessor
has done and to abandon the "us vs. them" mentality that has characterized
much of the Bush years.
You do have the sense, more so in the media than in policy circles, that many
here expect that Obama will rule as a "European president." That may turn out
to be wrong in several respects. By voting for Obama, Americans are not
voting to become an EU country.
Obama understands the changing world, and we can expect that he will
increasingly rely on partners in Asia -- not just partners in Europe. As
expected, I think he will be more multilateral in his approach, but that
doesn't mean he'll play below the weight of his country.
The biggest challenge will be to align agendas on both sides of the Atlantic.
This has been difficult in the past not only because European and American
interests partly diverge, but also because of differing styles and traditions
of behavior. Europeans, for instance, will never be as prepared to use
military force as Americans are.
There are other challenges, too: Americans and Europeans have to come to
agreement about concrete goals in Afghanistan. Is it democracy? Or simply
stability? Are we aiming for economic transformation, particularly in the
Pashtun tribal areas? Each side will have to determine what it is willing to
contribute.
As far as Russia is concerned, it will be easier for Obama than it would have
been for McCain to improve relations. Obama, after all, has not proposed
kicking Russia out of the G-8 or forming a league of democracies aligned
against it.
As far as Israel-Palestine is concerned, the opposite might be true. Obama
might face more domestic pressure on the issue than McCain would have,
because many Americans still suspect Obama of being a krypto-Muslim or at
least of being pro-Arab.
Ann Pettifor is the co-founder of the Jubilee 2000, a global campaign aimed
at cancelling $100 billion in debt owed by the 42 poorest countries. She is
currently a fellow at the New Economics Foundation in London and director of
Advocacy International.
My hope is that the next US president will help build a new, more just,
stable and sustainable global financial architecture, vital for balance and
stability in the world economy, but also for the eco-system.
In 1971, President Nixon unilaterally dismantled the post-war Bretton Woods
system, which maintained balance between the current and capital accounts of
nations. Through his refusal to honor the US's obligations to make repayments
in gold as required by Bretton Woods, Nixon's administration engineered the
biggest sovereign default in history. It is seldom described as such, but
that is what it was.
After the dismantling of Bretton Woods, the staff of the International
Monetary Fund were called upon to design a new architecture. Their efforts
failed and, by default, US Treasury bills (IOUs to the US government) at very
low rates of interest, were established as the world’s reserve asset. As a
result, countries with large numbers of poor, like China, India and South
Africa are obliged to use their reserves to make loans to the US, at very low
rates. They thereby finance consumption in a country with large numbers of
rich people. The system discourages the US from structurally adjusting its
economy, to restore balance. From being the world’s biggest creditor, the US
became the world’s biggest debtor.
This post-1971 architecture, combined with financial and trade deregulation,
fuelled US consumption. Increased consumption in turn fuelled carbon
emissions worldwide. Until the "debtonation" of August 2007 (the current
global financial crisis), this consumption appeared to be without limit, and
worsened international imbalances.
Imbalances at the heart of the global economy are in my view the root cause
of instability in the global financial system, but also the ecosystem.
Hans von Storch, director of the Institute for Coastal Research at the GKSS
Research Center in Geesthacht and climate researcher at the Institute of
Meteorology at the University of Hamburg, is one of Germany's preeminent
climate researchers.
There are two dimensions to my wishes: the values that the new man will
represent and his analytical capabilities. As far as values are concerned, I
expect respect for human rights and cultural diversity as called for under
international law. When it comes to analytical skills, I hope that the new
president will be able to distinguish between cultural constructs that lead
to "passionate" activism and, ultimately, unnecessary conflict, and
knowledge-based "cold" analysis. That he keeps an eye on the full range of
all relevant problems and does not narrow his horizons to focus on one
central issue, be it terrorism, the climate or the well-being of capitalism.
And, of course, that Guantanamo is closed immediately. Putting Rumsfeld
before an international court -- that too would be satisfying.
Part 8: 'Please Don't Bomb Iran'
Omid Nouripour, a native of Iran, is a member of the German Parliament
representing the Green Party.
The security of the entire Middle East is the foremost challenge of the
international community: We must avoid a vicious circle of armament stemming
from the conflicts there, defend the rights and dignity of the people, and
thus build a lasting peace. Dear President Obama: I would like to ask you for
two things: First and most importantly that you rule out the option of
military action against Iran. An attack on Iran would have uncontrollable
political consequences in the entire Middle East -- from Lebanon to Iraq, the
United Arab Emirates and all the way to Afghanistan. Moreover, it would
guarantee the re-election of the current President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who
otherwise stands very good chances of losing the next election due to his
disastrous economic policies.
The second favor I have to ask concerns the vivid civil society in Iran. I
put so much emphasis on this point because I intimately know the Iranian
people and their will to change things and take their fate into their own
hands. The women's right activists, students, labor unions, journalists,
bloggers, artists -- they all make up the backbone of the liberation movement
in the country. To help these people is to help the cause of democracy and
progress. The US cooperation with the Iranian civil society needs to be
reorganized. Your country gives over $100 million per year to the so-called
"Iran Democracy Fund" (IDF), which is supposed to help the "velvet
revolution," as President Bush called it. The results are disappointing and
even counterproductive. In Iran itself, the money is lost in corrupt
structures or goes to ineffective projects.
And what is worse, the IDF has become a pretext for the Iranian regime to
pursue unpleasant civil society activists, accusing them of taking American
money and working as spies for the USA. Besides, the IDF and its declared
goals hampers the collaboration of international NGOs with civil society
activists in the country, placing them under the suspicion of working
directly for a revolution in Iran -- a threat the regime cannot ignore.
Therefore I ask you urgently: stop the activity of the IDF. There is only one
way to effectively help the progressive forces in the country: Talk with
them, seriously consider their arguments and give them an echo in the
international community.
Ulrike Guérot heads the Berlin office of European Council on Foreign
Relations.
Barack Obama is a paradigm change for the US. He will need to change the way
the US acts in the world. The US has lost its political and -- now -- it’s
financial supremacy, and the country will need to adapt. And, perhaps of even
more concern, the country has lost a great deal of sympathy and reputation as
a result of the Bush administration -- especially among younger generations
abroad. Barack Obama conveys the policy of a "fresh start."
On foreign policy, this is likely to show in areas such as climate
protection, where Europe is keen to see an engaged US; or with respect to
Iraq, where a trans-Atlantic exit strategy is needed. Europe also expects a
new tone and a new style from the US. But one should not expect a
trans-Atlantic honeymoon. Obama will need Europe’s help and troops in
Afghanistan -- and Europe will be reluctant to deliver. The US and Europe
also increasingly differ on how to deal and what to do with Russia -- but
they avoid talking about it openly. The US seems to have more ‘Cold War’
reflexes when it comes to Russia, where Europe wants and needs the strategic
partnership.
The US could regain its leadership if it shows readiness to engage fully in
international law making, including human right policies at the UN. The world
needs a US that engages clearly into multilateralism and that stops believing
that it can better act alone only because it feels so strong.
The biggest potential is that the US will again fall into a pattern of
playing divide and conquer with Europe instead of promoting a strong and
truly united Europe.
Part 9: 'A Measure of Moral Leadership Would Be to Join the ICC'
Diego Hidalgo is co-founder of the Spanish newspaper El Pais and a member of
the European Council on Foreign Relations.
I would first expect the new US president to convey to the world the strong
message that the days of arrogant unilateralism are over. The next US
president will face a megacrisis in the US and the world, with several
interrelated threats which cannot be resolved at the nation-state level but
call for concerted action and for a new and much stronger international
governance architecture. The megacrisis that started in the financial sector
threatens to depress the world economy, affects the whole world, and offers
an opportunity for breakthrough in world governance. The first priority for
the US president should be to initiate a "world constitutional period" during
which he would develop coordinated responses to the four perhaps most urgent
problems: resolve the financial and economic crisis, undertake the measures
needed to face climate change, end extreme poverty and hunger throughout the
world and end the main wars and conflicts.
The new US president will have to commit not just to cooperate
internationally but to revamp or create international institutions able to
confront the four issues mentioned above as well as others like pandemics,
nuclear proliferation, disarmament and decreases in military budgets
throughout the world and cooperation against terrorism. Strengthening the UN,
World Bank and IMF will require engaging not only the EU but particularly
China and India, and giving an increased role to them and to new powers (like
Brazil).
In addition to strengthening the multilateral system of governance, the US
has an opportunity to regain the moral leadership and credibility lost over
the last eight years by closing Guantanamo Bay, strengthening international
law, putting all its weight into resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict
as well as the conflicts of Israel and Syria and Lebanon, and exiting Iraq as
soon as feasible. A measure of moral leadership, which I am realistic enough
not to expect, would be for the US to join the International Criminal Court
(ICC).
Jürgen Trittin is deputy parliamentary leader of the Green Party in the
German parliament.
Obama has promised change. But the new president must first "clean up after
the elephant." After the catastrophic Bush years, the United States needs a
general makeover. The consequences of the financial crisis must be dealt
with. For US citizens, I would like to see the gaps bridged between the
super-rich, the battered middle class and widespread poverty. Every citizen
should have health insurance.
Investment in infrastructure and new energy is needed. The world would like
to see the United States put an end to aggressive, unilateral military
action, a shift toward the United Nations, respect for human rights and the
closing of Guantanamo. Most of all, however, the mobilization of the original
American qualities of optimism and gumption when it comes to fighting climate
change.
Jeremy Hobbs is executive director of Oxfam International.
The major crises facing the world, failure of global governance, collapsing
financial markets, the threat of catastrophic climate change, continuing
poverty and hunger, and worsening global security, cannot be addressed
without positive and urgent leadership from the United States. Whoever is the
new president must use his political capital to drive this international
agenda, no matter how tough the domestic issues are.
If ever there was a time to demonstrate how narrow national self interest
should not be at the expense of the global good and developing countries, it
is now, in the midst of the current global financial crisis.
Beyond the measures being taken to stabilize and respond to the economic
crisis, the new president should support major reform of the global financial
architecture, and with it, help build a new global governance, one which
properly recognizes the importance of large emerging economies and does not
exclude smaller and poorer countries.
The same vigor the US and Europe demonstrated in this crisis by finding
billions of dollars to bail out their banks is also needed to address the
long-term structural changes needed in the financial system. The new
president must have the courage to step away from the failed Washington
consensus of untrammeled liberalization and embrace regulation which will
ensure greater stability and sustainability, support targeted state
intervention which addresses poverty, (such as for small-scale farmers in
poor countries) and close off tax havens. The president could demonstrate
goodwill by reducing US demands on developing countries in the WTO to enable
a deal to go forward.
He should push the G8 to broaden its membership, and ensure that developing
countries have genuine participation in institutions such as the World Bank
and the IMF, reflecting the changing reality of global power. Global problems
cannot be solved if key countries and those most affected are excluded. The
president can breathe new life into reform of the UN Security Council to
reflect the power realities of the modern world.
On climate change, the president needs to face down corporate self-interest
and enviro-skepticism to ensure that we achieve an ambitious global agreement
for reducing emissions at the Copenhagen Summit in 2009. He also needs to
make sure that substantial funding is found for helping developing countries
adapt to the impact of climate change they are already experiencing.
On poverty and food security, the near meltdown of the global economy should
be the last reason for reducing hard-won recent commitments to increase aid.
The president's first G-8 meeting in Italy should ensure that there is no
backsliding, especially when developing countries are likely to bear much of
the brunt of the global economic downturn caused by profligate behavior in
rich countries.
On security, apart from the need to make much better progress in Iraq and
Afghanistan, US leadership is also needed to ensure that the protection of
civilians in conflict is paramount, an issue highlighted by the unfolding
tragedy of the Democratic Republic of Congo. The president has a mandate from
the American electorate but a responsibility to the global community and for
that we expect moral and practical leadership.
Part 10: 'Obama -- Something that Is Still Impossible to Achieve in many
European Countries'
Dr. Jean-Yves Haine is a senior researcher for trans-Atlantic and global
security at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute in Sweden.
Electing Obama will in itself boost the US image abroad. Europe is looking
with admiration and envy at Obama, a symbol of something that is still
impossible to achieve in many European countries. After the election,
symbolic but important gestures could be made: Guantanamo closure (easier
said than done), the torture and rendition legacy, some amendment of the
Patriot Act (but not much). Mostly, the tone and language will be crucial: to
end the rhetoric of the war on terror, the us-versus-them mantra. ... This
will be necessary if the US wants to resume its role of honest broker in the
Middle East (but the burden of past decisions will be particularly heavy).
Loukas Tsoukalis is a professor of European integration at the University of
Athens and a special advisor to the president of the European Commission.
The first priority for the next White House must be to flexibly and
effectively tackle the global financial crisis. This will require cooperation
with others. The financial crisis, however, also provides an opportunity for
a new global economic order, which must include a radical reform of
international institutions like the IMF. These institutions need to be
modernized so they can address new challenges, rather than the challenges of
the 1960s. To achieve this, they need to reflect the current distribution of
power in the world, not the distribution of power that prevailed in the
aftermath of World War II.
It will be important that the new president takes a more multilateral
approach to dealing with the world's problems. Even Mr. Bush, late in the
game, proved willing to discuss reforming the way international financial
institutions are run.
It strikes me that Obama is more willing and able to adjust to the new era.
Obama seems more psychologically attuned to this new world in which power is
and will continue to be distributed much more broadly than in the past.
Of course, some kind of disappointment with the new president is inevitable.
In a way, Obama provides more potential for disappointment because
expectations for him are so high in Europe. But the world can't change
totally from one day to the next. The interests of the United States and the
European Union are not always exactly the same, and it would be foolish for
Europeans to expect that the United States will stop pursuing its interests.
On Afghanistan, I would hope that the new president undertake a serious
reassessment of whether that war is winnable, and of what we mean by
"victory." I also hope he will sit down with leaders in Iran.
As a Greek, I'm especially interested in the Balkans, and also in Turkey. The
US should continue to encourage Greece and Turkey to normalize their
relations. In the Balkans, I would hope that the next US administration would
take a more cooperative approach. Up to now, the United States has tended to
present its allies with faits accomplis in this region of the world,
particularly regarding Kosovo. You cannot start negotiations having already
announced what the final outcome will be. It's especially regrettable because
in the Balkans, there isn't really any divergence of interests between the US
and the EU.
Russia is a different matter. Europe has an interdependent relationship with
Russia as far as energy is concerned. The United States does not. How will
the next US president handle Putin and Medvedev? As an enemy to contain? Or
are there opportunities for partnership?
Miroslav Lajcak is High Representative and EU Special Representative for
Bosnia and Hercegovina.
From the perspective of Bosnia and Herzegovina, our priority is that the US,
along with its international partners, remains fully engaged in supporting
the countries of the Western Balkans as they move towards full integration in
the EU.
When George Bush took over from Bill Clinton in 2001, Bosnia was still very
fragile, politically, socially and economically, its people still dealing
with the immediate and terrible legacy of the war. Eight years on, as a new
administration takes over in Washington, a huge amount of progress has been
made. Bosnia is now poised to complete its postwar recovery and secure full
integration in NATO and the EU.
However our mission is not yet complete. Significant threats have arisen that
could derail the entire process in its final stages. That is why Bosnia
continues to require close attention and sustained engagement.
The Dayton Peace Agreement was signed only after the US took the lead on
forging a negotiated settlement to the conflict of the early 1990s. The US
continues to be directly involved in helping Bosnia establish the
institutions and practices that will allow it to develop as a normal
democracy. It is this process which must now be supported so that the country
and its leadership can ensure that the ad hoc aspects of the postwar
settlement -- such as the Office of the High Representative -- can be phased
out and replaced with permanent institutions that are a normal part of
European democratic governance.
Washington is uniquely equipped to support this process. For all the
differences between the US and the 27 EU Member States in terms of languages
and culture, there is a bedrock of shared belief in democracy, in social,
political and economic freedoms and in the rule of law. We hope that the new
US administration will bring a renewed commitment to the core values that
have traditionally underpinned the trans-Atlantic relationship -- the same
values that will underpin Bosnia and Herzegovina’s continued progress.
Xavier Declercq is a project director with Oxfam-Solidarité Belgique in
Belgium.
I would like to see the new US president influence the rules of international
trade in such a way that they promote the development of countries in the
south, and that the United States pursue a less interventionist policy that
begins with multilateral dialogue. That the United States take other actors
in the world more seriously. And that the US keep its promises and truly
defend the interests of people in developing countries.
Hans Joachim Schellnhuber is director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate
Impact Research in Germany.
As someone who worked in the United States for many years and made many
friends there, I am disappointed by the image America has projected in recent
years. I would like to see the next president help his country regain the
respect it deserves. This requires that attention be paid, once again, to the
increasingly important role of science for the well-being of modern
societies. But the most important thing will be to practice "leadership" on
the international stage instead of constantly talking about it: in climate
protection, in the transformation of energy systems and in securing the
world's food supply.
Incidentally, true leadership requires regaining the capacity for self-irony.
--
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 140.117.16.77
※ 編輯: pursuistmi 來自: 140.117.16.77 (11/05 16:37)