Two cheers for Barack Obama

by The Conversation / 11 January, 2017

As the US bids farewell to Obama, Professor Mark Beeson takes a look at the significance of his presidency. 

Barack Obama’s presidency was always bound to be something of a disappointment. Few presidents can have entered office with such great expectations, not least because of what went before him.

Indeed, when we try to make sense of the significance of Obama’s term in office, we need to remember the truly appalling legacy he inherited from his predecessor.

Not only did George W Bush begin an entirely unnecessary and disastrous conflict in the Middle East – the consequences of which continue to destabilise the region to this day – but he also helped trigger a major economic crisis that threatened to bring down the international banking system.

The massive spending – and deficits – required by Bush’s ruinously expensive war in Iraq contributed to America’s economic problems. But the efforts of the Bush administration to wind back a painstakingly constructed, largely effective, regulatory framework that exercised some degree of control over the banking system and its self-destructive pathologies was another entirely avoidable incidence of self-harm on an epic scale.

The first thing Obama had to do on taking office, therefore, was to stop the international financial sector from falling off a cliff and prevent icons of American manufacturing like General Motors from going bust.

The fact that the sky didn’t fall in tends to be forgotten or wilfully ignored by Obama’s growing army of critics. If he did nothing else, though, staving off the world’s second Great Depression looks pretty good on the CV.

He might have done much more if he hadn’t been so initially bogged down with cleaning up someone else’s mess, not to mention dealing with a hostile, ideologically recalcitrant Congress that remained implacably opposed to everything he did. Whatever else the Trump presidency has to deal with, the domestic institutional roadblocks should be easier to navigate.

That Obama managed to get his signature healthcare reforms through Congress is a minor miracle, although one that is likely to rapidly dismantled on ideological grounds – not to mention the fact that “big pharma” will be enthusiastically backing its repeal.

Bizarrely, some of the people who actually benefit most from Obamacare – poor, white and working class – are also the most hostile to Obama and his “socialist” policies.

It is testimony to just how difficult it is to have a rational, much less an informed, debate about key elements of public policy in the US that such counter-intuitive outcomes are possible.

It is not necessary to be a conspiracy theorist or even a critical Marxist to recognise that there’s something odd, rather sad and deeply troubling about people voting against people and policies from which they might have been the principal beneficiaries.

Sadly, the domestic agenda, disappointing as it has been in many ways, was arguably Obama’s strong suit.

Critics argue that procrastination and an unwillingness to use America’s undoubted military might decisively has made the situation in the Middle East even worse. Red lines were crossed by the likes of Bashar al-Assad with no consequences, something that encouraged Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping to test America’s commitment to maintaining its primacy, the arguments go.

Perhaps so. And yet, “don’t do stupid stuff” is not the worst strategic doctrine the world has ever seen. Indeed, when contrasted with Bush in particular, it looks entirely reasonable and in keeping with a highly complex and unstable international order that defies quick fixes.

More pointedly, we actually know what happens when American administrations are determined to do stupid stuff, no matter how implausible such a strategy may be.

If we’ve collectively learned anything over the course of the last few decades – indeed, the last few millennia – it ought to be that wars are a lot easier to start than they are to finish. They generally don’t have happy endings either.

Perhaps a few carefully calibrated surgical strikes would have made a difference in Syria, but the record of American intervention over recent years is not encouraging. The motto “if you break it you own it” is worth keeping in mind.

We will soon have the opportunity to compare and contrast Obama’s presidency with someone who is altogether more impulsive and apparently determined to act decisively.

Whether the Hulk is preferable to Hamlet we shall have to wait and see. But that we came through one of the more troubled periods in recent history more or less in one piece is perhaps as much as “we” – privileged denizens of what’s left of the Western world – can hope for.

Donald Trump may rapidly discover that there are no tweet-sized solutions to the world’s problems. Winston Churchill’s famous aphorism may prove alarmingly prescient:

Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing, but only after they have exhausted all other possibilities.

Obama’s great attribute was that he recognised in advance how dangerous and counterproductive certain actions could be. There is absolutely no guarantee that his successor does. The Obama presidency may yet go down as a relatively sane and sober period bookended by the two worst presidents in American history.

The Conversation

 - Mark Beeson, Professor of International Politics, University of Western Australia

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

MostReadArticlesCollectionWidget - Most Read - Used in articles
AdvertModule - Advert - M-Rec / Halfpage

Latest

NZME-Stuff media merger saga goes to court
81581 2017-10-16 12:54:33Z Business

NZME-Stuff media merger saga goes to court

by Colin Peacock

New Zealand's two biggest publishers of news go to court today to try to overturn the competition watchdog's refusal to green-light a merger.

Read more
The living hell experienced by Rohingya Muslims
81556 2017-10-16 11:02:05Z World

The living hell experienced by Rohingya Muslims

by Kate White

Kate White, a co-ordinator with Médecins Sans Frontières, describes daily life for Rohingya who have fled to Bangladesh - and how you can help.

Read more
Why some people get wheezy when peeling potatoes
81550 2017-10-16 10:31:13Z Nutrition

Why some people get wheezy when peeling potatoes

by Jennifer Bowden

As if living with hay fever isn’t enough, many people with oral allergy syndrome also react to certain foods.

Read more
I almost punched a man in front of the Mona Lisa in the Louvre
81545 2017-10-16 10:11:56Z Travel

I almost punched a man in front of the Mona Lisa i…

by Joanne Black

It was hard to raise a smile at the Mona Lisa, but the rest of the Louvre more than made up for it.

Read more
Is New Zealand turning away from the welfare state?
81539 2017-10-16 07:37:07Z Social issues

Is New Zealand turning away from the welfare state…

by Philippa Tolley

MSD says its mission is to help people look after themselves - so why are there so many complaints about its lack of humanity?

Read more
Dunedin city councillors question $980k payout to power company CEO
81536 2017-10-16 07:20:46Z Business

Dunedin city councillors question $980k payout to …

by Emile Donovan

Grady Cameron received a $980,000 payout after resigning from his position, but the makeup of the payment is confidential.

Read more
How the toxicity of Twitter drove Duncan Garner and Sean Plunket away
81532 2017-10-16 06:43:06Z Social issues

How the toxicity of Twitter drove Duncan Garner an…

by Colin Peacock

Sean Plunket says Twitter brings out the worst in people - including himself.

Read more
Urewera raid pair Tame Iti and Rangikaiwhiria Kemara seek pardon
81529 2017-10-16 06:29:20Z History

Urewera raid pair Tame Iti and Rangikaiwhiria Kema…

by Mihingarangi Forbes

It's 10 years since Tame Iti and Rangikaiwhiria Kemara were jailed on firearms convictions, but it's the 'terrorist' label that haunts them.

Read more