Like my friend Blogos, I've been falling into the fall at a rate that is, as Nixon would have it, immediate and precipitous. I've spent a bit of time with the president's speech at the UN and, although I don't want to venture a full evaluation, what strikes me most is the legacy of John F. Kennedy.
You see it first in the language. When Obama speaks of domestic issues or when he campaigns, he sounds like MLK--he echoes the repetitive phrasing, the climax constructions, the stories, the biblical allusions. But when he addresses foreign policy, like the Cairo University address for instance, he picks up the cadence and the style of JFK.
Take the opening. Obama's second line is the sort of rolling triad (a three phrase, balanced sentence) favored by Winston Churchill, John Kennedy, and, ironically, George W. Bush. From there, Obama consistently invokes the short, punchy phrases that characterized Kennedy's style, putting the disjunctive alternatives to particularly good use: "The religious convictions that we hold in our hearts can forge new bonds among people, or they can tear us apart. The technology we harness can light the path to peace, or forever darken it. The energy we use can sustain our planet or destroy it." The short phrases, the stark alternatives, the light/dark metaphor, the active voice, the alliteration, and even the small internal metaphors (bonds/harness) also marked JFK's discourse.
Nor is the resemblance only stylistic. Like JFK in many venues (particularly American University), President Obama urges the world to act on the basis of both interests and values: "We must embrace a new era of engagement based on mutual interest and mutual respect." This is a kind of right makes might philosophy, one characteristic of both John and Robert Kennedy. Call it liberal realism.
Obama, like Kennedy, believes there is evil in the world and believes we face difficult adversaries. But if we engage those adversaries, draw them into the global economy, they'll be unable to compete, as the Soviet Union was unable to compete, in a liberal global order. If it's a battle of consumer goods between the US and al Qaeda, we, um, win. We're Florida and they're Charleston Southern. Seriously.
Third, like Kennedy, Obama loves structure and he recognizes the importance of good will. So, just as AU included concrete steps to demonstrate that the US was interested in a new relationship with the USSR, so, too does this speech begin with a series of concrete steps that have already demonstrated US sincerity since Obama took office. Just as AU worked through a series of carefully organized questions, so, too, does Obama idenitfy four pillars "that I believe are fundamental to the future that we want for our future."
And that is a fourth resemblance. Like Kennedy, Obama consistently differentiates between past and future. That pair is combined with several others: easy/hard, simple/complex, old/new. All are designed to contrast the laziness with which we can perpetuate old conflicts with the restlessness with which his audience, the preferred identity we adopt, approaches the future. We are smart, subtle, careful, tough, reasonable, strong, and competent. That is, in fact, JFK's liberal realism.
A realism that's also distinguished by reciprocity--what works for one, works for another. That's the fundamental notion of fairness that JFK brought to the world stage and so does Obama. For instance, "The United States does Israel no favors when we fail to couple an unwavering commitment to its security with an insistence that Israel respect the legitimate claims and rights of the Palestineans. And--and nations within this body do the Palestineans no favors when they choose vitriolic attacks against Israel over constructive willingness to recognize Israel's legitimacy and its right to exist in peace and security."
Yet there is one additional reciprocity note worthy of exploration. President Obama has sent a series of signals of late that he will no longer tolerate, for lack of a better word, free riders. Here's the line, excerpted often in the last few days: "Those who used to chastise America for acting alone in the world cannot now stand by and wait for America to solve the world's problems. We have sought--in word and deed--a new era of engagement with the world. And now it is time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges."
I suspect Obama, seeing an America with limited resources, is tired of deploying the vast majoirty of the military force that is used; tired of a global economy which relies far too heavily on the American consumer as the consumer of last resort; tired of nations relying on his stimulus package to be the primary stimulus package; and tired of critics who won't step up to the plate.
I'm probably overstating a bit--but not a ton. Obama is willing to engage, but he needs a response. Reciprocity is the core principle of his liberal realism.
