Can President-elect Obama Rise to the Occasion?

The world, rightly or wrongly, has high hopes from President-elect Obama. During his election campaign he promised to change the world. I do believe he means it but I am not sure whether he fully understands the implications There is another important question too. Even if understands the implications of his promise of changing the world, will he be able to deliver anything meaningful? Let us look at some of his major challenges.

The most important foreign policy challenge before the President-elect is whether he can recover the credibility of the United States as a country which believes in the “Rule of Law?’

Most American presidents since the Second World War have used the international law and institutions when it has suited America and discarded them when it does not. The President-elect has to convince the world that America will henceforth abide by international law even if it goes against American interests.

He may be sincere about fighting terrorism but he must realize that terrorism in one form or another will continue until a just solution is found for the Palestinian crisis. My guess is that with his close association with the Israeli lobbies in America, not many people in the world, let alone in the Islamic world, can believe that he is capable of taking an even-handed approach to solve the crisis and help to secure a just solution. His appointment of Hillary Clinton as the Secretary of State confirms such feelings. Admittedly, the Palestinian problem is not easy to solve, since the political power in Israel has been taken over by the right-wing elements who dream of a Biblical Israel. It is this group which is supported by the right-wing Israeli lobbies and the Evangelical Christians in America. To the best of my knowledge, the majority of Israeli and Palestinian people are more moderate in their views and are prepared to make sacrifices for peace in terms of ceding land. Jerusalem may be a sticking point. Even on this issue there may be some scope for flexibility Jerusalem, being the birth place of three religions could be declared a religious city state like the Vatican, run and managed by a democratically elected government by the people living in Jerusalem. The rest of the disputed territories could be divided between the Israelis and the Palestinians by negotiations, both states with security guarantees from the United Nations.

I, being a Gandhian, dislike any country having nuclear weapons. So I am with the Preisdent-elects in his efforts towards dissuading Iran from having nuclear weapons, but then I would like him to persuade other countries including Israel to give up nuclear weapons. Will he support the Middle East being declared a non-nuclear zone, an idea supported by many countries in the region?.

Will he take the lead in giving up American nuclear weapons? Will he stop the development and production of new nuclear weapons such as ‘bunker-busting’ nuclear devices?

With wide spread poverty and destitution around the world, there is a crying need for a drastic reduction in the military budgets internationally. The United States military budget exceeds the total military expenditure of the world as a whole. Will he take the lead in reducing the US military budget significantly (simply by closing down of many of the military bases abroad) and divert the money to reducing domestic poverty and destitution? Not many Americans realize that such bases are often humiliating (or at least an irritant) to the local population and serve no real purpose. Peace can be guaranteed by a reinvigorated UN system and the supply of natural resources can be ensured through trade.

One of the ways of fighting against terrorism is to fight against poverty, hunger and deprivation. This can be done by diverting money from defense expenditure to economic development. One way of doing this is to combine the NATO forces and the UN Peace-keeping forces under the UN banner.. This would not only provide teeth to the UN operations, it would have a major psychological impact internationally. In the Third World NATO forces are seen as a means of colonial control of the resources of the Third World for the colonial masters; Merged with the UN forces this stigma loses force. Such a merger allows America to handover troubled areas like Iraq and Afghanistan to the UN without losing face. I see no reason for the American influence being undermined in this arrangement.


Many countries, including China and Russia are opposed to the weaponization of Space. It is the United States which has been reluctant to support such moves. Will the President-elect take the lead against weaponization Space?

Such decisions are not easy. If the President-elect has the courage and succeeds in his efforts he will have succeeded in changing the world as he promised during his election campaign and he will go down in history as one of the greatest statesman of the twenty first century. But the chances are that he will not be forgiven by the conservatives in America. This may cost him his second term. Whether the gamble is worth taking, is the greatest choice facing the Preident-elect.