But The Donald could credibly claim that however impressive Obama’s
reading list may have been before the late 2000s, he hardly read books
on foreign policy. Ironically, Obama, whose nativity is questioned by
a shockingly large number of Americans, instinctively militated to the
original isolationist sentiments of the nation’s founding fathers. In
fact, so strong was this isolationist predisposition that he famously
declined to hypothetically consider the possibility of deploying
troops in Iraq to prevent genocide. Genocides have happened elsewhere
in the world without America intervening, he reasoned.
This was the Obama that attained the Presidency with a respectable
plurality in 2008.But a retreat to the familiar shores of continental
America, as had once happened in 1918, when the US tragically refused
to join and lead the League of Nations after the First World War, is
hardly a possibility in the age of nuclear armed Pakistan.
The only alternative for Obama was between realism, which is
multi-literalist, strictly interest driven and ostensibly in perfect
sync with the persona of no-drama-Obama , and what he had criticized
as the discredited idealism of his predecessor, which was precariously
and unsustainably unilateral in approach and execution.
Obama reckons that America’s future lies in the Far East, in South
Asia and the Orient. Bush’s fixation with the Middle East was a
strategic blunder that he intended to correct urgently. Canada,
Mexico, Latin America, the Middle East, and even Europe, which has
dominated the world for the past half a millennium, would have to
settle for back stage. Africa, of course, comes last.
But with the menacing threat of Al-Qaeda still unabated, immediate
reorientation of American foreign policy was not politically and
psychologically feasible for a Democratic President. However sensible
the analyses, though, they also sounded like convenient excuses by a
weak President to capitulate and run away from an intractable problem.
Obama was unwittingly no less entangled in the Middle East than past
administrations.
A respite from the suspicions has now come Obama’s way courtesy of the
death of Osama bin Laden. There will no more be the comparisons with
Jimmy Carter. There will now be less pressure on him to sustain the
war on terror as the central theme of America’s foreign policy. Al
Qaeda is undeniably not finished yet, but the loss of its iconic
leader will most probably weaken it considerably. At least this is the
consensus. America could finally move on. Policy shift could begin in
earnest.
This is bad news for the EPRDF.
The White House had quietly assessed the prospect of change in key US
allies like Ethiopia well before the death of Osama bin Laden.
Involved in the assessment was Gayle Smith, an old friend of the EPRDF
and now a mid-level N.S.C staffer. Two broad conclusions emerged from
the review:
1. Regimes cooperate with the US on security issues not for altruistic
motives but because it is in their critical interests to do so.
2. There is no correlation between a nation’s economic wealth and
democracy, the most oft cited rational for US support of autocratic
regimes in the developing world.(Apparently, the US Ambassador to
Ethiopia, Donald Booth, who held a press conference after the review
suggesting such a link, disagrees with the White House.)
In other words, in sharp contrast to the Bush years, the Obama
administration has determined that the EPRDF has no fewer stakes than
the US security cooperation. Moreover, the tendency in the
administration is to view Al-Shabaab, America’s primary concern in the
horn, more of as a nationalist outfit, a reaction to Ethiopian
invasion, than a worrisome branch of global jihad. The State
Department’s 2009 report on terrorism maintains that no operational
link between Al-Shabaab and Al-Qaeda has been established.
But of course all this does not mean that the Obama administration is
firmly in favor of people power revolution in Ethiopia. It is not.
What sets it apart from the Bush years is that it sees fewer stakes
for the US in the status-quo. It will not fight change as the Bush
administration once did in 2005.
In the event of protests, the Obama administration will most probably
try to maintain a delicate balance between protesters, which it could
not avoid lending political, moral and diplomatic support, and the
EPRDF, which it does not want to be perceived as abandoning hastily.
US allies in the region after all would be watching closely. But doubt
not that its sentiment and heart will be with protesters. There is
little sympathy in Washington for the EPRDF after the last elections.
Its peaceful departure would most probably be welcomed rather than
lamented. The death of Osama bin Laden reinforces the sentiment.
Addressing the World Economic Forum in South Africa on Thursday, May
5, 2011, former UN Secretary General, Koffi Annan, predicated that
mass protests may yet spread from the Arab world to black Africa. The
independence of one African country inspired others to follow suit, he
recalled of events in the early 60’s. “I see no reason why people now
won’t want to do the same,” he said. These are sober words from an
experienced man. They carry considerable weight.
Annan was of course not speaking of his home country, Ghana. Democracy
is irreversible there now. Nor could he have had Ghana’s giant
regional neighbor, Nigeria, in mind. There is finally hope for
democracy in Africa’s largest country. And democratic South Africa has
transformed (by example) SADC. There is no danger of mass protests
sweeping southern Africa.
It is rather Ethiopia, where an unpopular leader who has been in power
for two decades is still recklessly maneuvering to stay in power
indefinitely, which looms dominantly in the horizon when sub-Sahara
Africa is mulled over. Annan did not need to single out countries.
The Obama administration knows this. And it sees no reason to resist
change. This is good news to Ethiopians.
///////////////////////////////////////
Note to Readers:
My weekly Amharic articles will resume a week from Tuesday.
Fight tyranny from your PC! Please continue to post articles on your
facebook pages.
