POLITICO asked politicians, analysts and writers to weigh in on Barack and the transatlantic relationship.

By POLITICO

Barack Obama burst onto the European scene in 2008 in Berlin, with a speech that dazzled a crowd of thousands. His hopeful and fresh rhetoric hit a nerve on a continent disillusioned with the interventionist politics of the Bush era. Expectations sky-rocketed.

And quickly plummeted. Russia’s annexation of Crimea; the NSA wire-tap scandal; the escalating civil war in Syria; the spread of terror in the Middle East and ensuing waves of refugees: Obama’s eight years in office have been riddled with crises that strained the transatlantic relationship, and for which he faced harsh criticism.

This week he goes to Britain and Germany, perhaps his last visit to two of his closest European allies. So what has Obama meant for Europe — and vice versa? What will be his legacy on the Continent — and what will define it?

Ten leading politicians, thinkers and commentators weigh in on Obama’s rocky 8-year relationship with the Old Continent.

* * *

Europe will never have pride of place in the White House again

When it comes to his track record on Europe, President Obama is likely to be remembered for two things. First, he continued to pursue a foreign policy in which Europe was a major, but no longer the main, focus of American foreign policy. Second, he reaffirmed America’s strong commitment to the defense of all NATO partners — most notably newer members in Eastern Europe.

For nearly a quarter century, American foreign policy has moved steadily from its Cold War focus on Europe to a more global perspective. Now Asia and the Middle East compete with the Old Continent for Washington’s attention. Europe is still important to America — but Europeans need to accept that they no longer has pride of place in the White House, no matter who occupies the Oval Office.

American foreign policy has moved steadily from its Cold War focus on Europe to a more global perspective.
Still, Obama took critical steps to reaffirm America’s commitment to European defense. Early in 2009, he insisted on NATO contingency plans for the defense of all allies — including the Baltic States who were not previously included. He also pushed NATO to deploy modern anti-missile systems, major parts of which are now operational.

Obama also moved quickly to reassure European allies following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2014, deploying forces on land, at sea, and in the air. Earlier this year, the administration announced a $3.4 billion initiative to bolster the U.S.’s NATO presence, which, as during the Cold War, underscores its readiness to stand by its longstanding European partners.

Europe may not be the sole focal point of American foreign policy, but the United States under Obama has remained fully committed to an enduring defense and economic relationship with its most important partners.

Ivo Daalder served as U.S. Ambassador to NATO from 2009-13 and currently is president of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs.

 * * *

Why should Obama cut us any slack?

It should have been a marriage made in transatlantic heaven. On the one side of the ocean, we, the European Union. On the other, Barack Obama, an admirably hard-working and highly intelligent man, a defender of multilateralism and a law-based international order, a critic of unthinking American interventionism espousing a coolly dispassionate, quasi-European perspective on American power, its pitfalls and limitations. A politician, moreover, who grew up abroad, and can view and feel American power the way foreigners do. A man of mixed racial heritage, more deeply aware than his predecessors that American history is built on oppression as much as on liberation, and therefore more conscious of the dangers of a messianic approach to U.S. adventurism abroad.

For all these reasons and others, many of us in Europe cried with joy and relief when he was elected. Yet, somehow, something went terribly wrong — the marriage, while not wholly disastrous, has remained barren. Why?

It should have been a marriage made in transatlantic heaven.
As ever, fault can be found on both sides. It has been a problem that Obama’s methodical, coolly dispassionate analytical intelligence makes him highly intolerant of less cerebral intellects and not-so-well-structured organizations. Temperamentally, Obama was disinclined to cut us rich mollycoddled Europeans any slack — and indeed, why should he? We messed up on Libya and nearly-enough messed up in a big way on our own eurozone crisis. The smorgasbord of mediocre leaders we have served up during the eight years of Obama’s presidency — with the President’s mind-mate Angela Merkel a rare exception — combined with the unreformed ludicrousness of our EU foreign policy set-up, makes engaging with us the dreariest and most irksome of slogs.

Will Hillary Clinton, the likeliest next U.S.-President, be more patient? Probably. But we Europeans would be fools to count on it.

Thomas Klau is a former Washington correspondent of Financial Times Deutschland and director of K-Feld & Co.

* * *

Obama did us a favor: We can’t afford to outsource foreign policy

Obama has trodden a far-from-faultless path abroad. His biggest mistake, in his own words, was not to follow-up on the Libya intervention, allowing the country to disintegrate and Islamic extremism to flourish. To this, I’d add: his refusal to intervene in Syria after he swore to do so if Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons against his own people.

Despite major mistakes, Obama’s dovish foreign policy stance has not been bad from a principled point of view. There is nothing wrong with being a cautious leader abroad; certainly not when you consider his predecessor. Obama has been fairly consistent. And he is right to say that over the past few decades, Europe often pushed the U.S. to act but showed “an unwillingness to put any skin in the game.” There are few credible rebuttals to his criticism that Europe has been “a free rider” for years.

It is high time for us to realize we cannot outsource our foreign policy and military clout to other nations.
Was it America’s duty to act in North Africa and the Middle East, or was it ours? After all, there is an ocean between America and the Middle East, while it is quite literally our backyard. It is only logical for the U.S. to gradually lose interest in the region now that it has gained energy independence. The global conditions are such that Obama’s successor might very well stay the course in that regard.

So let us not misread Obama’s foreign policy for an exception to the rule, but let us see it for what it is: a wake-up call. With the Middle East, more than ever, our problem too, Europe needs to create a tight defense union that gives credibility to a more united foreign policy. It is high time for us to realize we cannot outsource our foreign policy and military clout to other nations. Obama has made that very clear.

Guy Verhofstadt is European parliamentary group leader for the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE), and former prime minister of Belgium.

* * *

A disappointing love affair

It has certainly been a long, strange trip with President Obama. As with so many ill-fated love affairs it started with a bang of passion. His appearance in Berlin in the summer of 2008 captured European minds, but especially our hearts. After eight years of George W. Bush, here was a president that said all the right “European” things, and reignited the love in our transatlantic love-hate relationship. We even pinned Obama with the Nobel Peace Prize. Alas, it was not meant to be. With expectations that high we set ourselves up for disappointment.

Our love soon became unrequited. With the Obama administration’s pivot to Asia, it seemed that America had turned its back on a crisis-stricken Europe. We fumed and hemmed and hawed. Then came betrayal and the revelation of the National Security Agency’s worldwide surveillance. Europeans were shocked to find that Angela Merkel’s phone, along with millions of private communications, had been tapped under our beloved President Obama. The damage was real and the anti-Americanism that has been a consistent element of Europe’s post-World War II ethos reared its head.

The damage was real and the anti-Americanism that has been a consistent element of Europe’s post-World War II ethos reared its head.
With Russia’s annexation of Crimea came the realization that we both need each other. A civil, if a bit cold, relationship developed. This distant functionality has come to define these last years with some successes, with the Iran Nuclear Agreement was exhibit A, and some failures — most notably Syria.

Perhaps by some bold stroke — like TTIP perhaps — Obama will end this meandering relationship on a memorable note. But the way we see Obama will most likely be defined by who follows him. If it is Donald Trump, we will pine for the salad days of Victoria Nuland’s “Fuck the EU.” All-in-all, I fear, the lasting impression that Barack Obama will leave us with is one of disenchantment.

Ana Palacio is an international lawyer and the former foreign minister of Spain.

* * *

We can’t blame Obama for our own failure

To many Europeans, Obama is the president who didn’t love them enough. The end of his second term has confirmed some of his European partners in their position, as evaluations of his outspokenness on sensitive subjects like Libya or Europe’s lack of competitiveness swarm national media.

I don’t share their conviction. Obama has absolutely not been a Euro-shy president. He has demonstrated a quality that is typical to us as Europeans too — the tendency to see ourselves as the center of the world. We reacted to Obama’s pivot to Asia as jealous lovers would, and overlooked the fact that Obama made a natural and fundamental choice in a country that is just as Pacific as it is Atlantic. We too should be looking toward Asia as the future, considering that its growing importance now appears unstoppable.

Obama has absolutely not been a Euro-shy president. He has demonstrated a quality that is typical to us as Europeans too — the tendency to see ourselves as the center of the world.
Obama has worked side by side with us on every sensitive issues we’ve faced. He helped the EU get out of the euro crisis; he shared major decision-making with Europe on crucial international issues like Libya, Syria, Ukraine, and Iran; he pushed for returning from a G-8 to a G-7 summit, thereby creating a new forum for transatlantic cooperation. Most significantly, he didn’t divide Europe the way his predecessor did.

Basically, I don’t see what we could possibly hold against him.

We should be reflecting on our own failure, as Europeans, to become decisive central players in a changing world.

Enrico Letta is a former prime minister of Italy.

* * *

Europe still has a place in the U.S. grand design

Barack Obama is the first U.S. President in seven decades for whom Europe felt no closer than any other part of the world. He never really experienced divided Germany or the long stand-off with the Soviet Union. Obama represents a country that is redefining its global priorities away from the 20th century pattern. Europe certainly matters, but no longer as much.

What some commentators call the “new Cold War” between the United States and Russia will not change that fact. For Obama, today’s Russia is more of a nuisance than a rival on the scale of the USSR. Obama has, of course, continued to reassure ever-jittery Eastern Europeans, but his administration doesn’t consider Ukraine to be worthy of much of its time. The situation is now squarely in German and EU hands.

The quarter century-long period of unchallenged U.S. global dominance, the genuine Pax Americana, is over.
Yet the quarter century-long period of unchallenged U.S. global dominance, the genuine Pax Americana, is over. Russian actions in Crimea, Donbass and Syria, on one hand, and China’s strategic moves on sea and on land, on the other, signal the return of major power rivalries. India is inching in the same direction. The Middle East is already mostly a playground for regional players, with the U.S.’s role significantly reduced. The United States continues to be dominant, but its dominance no longer goes unchallenged.

Obama has had to face up to new realities. While his foreign policy is often dismissed as lacking focus, twin economic deals — the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) — suggest otherwise. They represent strategic initiatives on the scale of the Bretton Woods system and the NATO alliance. Obama’s “retrenchment” is not a reversal toward isolationism — he merely shifted gears as the going got harder. Europe definitely has a place in the new U.S grand design, only its exclusivity is a thing of the past.

Dmitri Trenin is director of the Carnegie Moscow Center.

* * *

Obama has neglected his European allies

President Obama’s “pivot” to Asia starting in 2011 sent a terrible signal to Europe. His foreign policy emphasis on the rise and importance of the East implied that he saw Europe as a continent in decline. His recent comments in the Atlantic underscored his lack of interest: He gratuitously slighted European allies, especially the U.K.’s David Cameron, and slammed them as free-loaders for not spending enough on defense. Obama’s visit this week to London, with Brits distracted by their upcoming referendum, is too little too late to salvage what was the special U.S.-UK relationship.

Overall, transatlantic relations have suffered badly under Obama’s watch.
Obama delegated the biggest challenge to European security during his presidency — Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — to Germany’s Angela Merkel. Obama has yet to set foot in Ukraine as President (he did as a Senator), missing a huge opportunity to demonstrate solidarity with beleaguered Ukrainians, and has refused to provide lethal assistance critical for Ukrainians to defend themselves. Similarly, he failed to visit Paris to pay his respects after the terrorist attacks there last November although he was in Turkey at the time. TTIP has stalled, and NATO has suffered from weak American leadership.

Overall, transatlantic relations have suffered badly under Obama’s watch. Only a Trump administration — gulp! — might burnish Obama’s European legacy.

David J. Kramer is senior director for human rights and democracy at the McCain Institute in Washington, D.C.

* * *

A transatlantic relationship on the rocks

Obama comes to Europe as the president who promised a new dawn in transatlantic relations. Just think back to the ecstatic reception he received in Berlin in 2008 from hundreds of thousands of Germans, the grandchildren of those who had similarly hailed Kennedy in 1963. But at the end of his presidency the transatlantic alliance has never less sure of its future.

If the U.K. votes to leave the EU in its June referendum, the event would blow European unity apart, and play into the kind of U.S. isolationism articulated by Donald Trump. Obama has done little to preserve the heritage of his predecessors, from Roosevelt to the Bushes.

Unlike Bill Clinton, or the Eisenhower generation who knew what happened when the U.S. ignored Europe, or indeed Ronald Reagan who forged an alliance with Margaret Thatcher to bury Soviet communism, Obama has the thinnest record on Europe of any American president since U.S. distanced itself from Europe between 1919-1941.

Kennedy had “Ich bin ein Berliner”; Reagan’s “Tear down this wall” resonated throughout Europe. Obama has had no comparable European moment.

His notorious interview with Jeffrey Goldberg in the Atlantic scorned leaders like Nicolas Sarkozy and David Cameron for their grand-standing in Libya. He has no strategy to counter Putin’s aggressive tactics in Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine, or Putin’s plans to extend control over the Arctic. Kennedy had “Ich bin ein Berliner”; Reagan’s “Tear down this wall” resonated throughout Europe. Obama has had no comparable European moment. Obama’s pivot to Asia has turned U.S. global policy into a zero sum game, leaving Europeans to feel abandoned. As we have seen, when Europeans are left to their own devices inward-looking populist nationalist demons resurface.

To be sure, Obama found no partners in a Europe short of leadership. But he has shown no interest himself in being a leader in a new transatlantic era. If the next president can’t breathe life in the alliance, it may be time to write its obituary.

Denis MacShane is a former U.K. Minister of Europe and author of “Brexit: How Britain Will Leave Europe.”

* * *

Europe should focus on developing its own foreign and security policies

Obama’s foreign policy legacy for Europe has really been to compel European policy makers to think more thoroughly about the end of the uni-polar moment in international relations.

Obama was seen as a president who over-compensated for the interventionism and unilateralism that came define his predecessor, George W. Bush. But by the same token, the recalcitrance of the U.S. to play a forceful role in settling the multitude of crises facing Europe should serve as a dire reminder that Europe needs to fully develop its foreign and security policies.

Obama offered Europe a seat at the table: an opportunity for partnership in addressing global crises. The scene was set for Europe to implement its aspirations of “effective multilateralism.”

Obama offered Europe a seat at the table … But the tragedy is that this evolution overlapped with a period of crisis within Europe itself.
But the tragedy is that this evolution overlapped with a period of crisis within Europe itself. Handicapped by the economic crisis and then by a growing lack of internal cohesion, the EU failed to demonstrate it could be a mature and capable international actor.

Yet the end of the Obama years won’t solve Europe’s conundrum. Obama’s prudence is likely to continue to have an impact U.S. foreign policy decision making in years to come. For one, the world has had to acknowledge the limits of U.S. power. To the extent that it continues to rely on U.S. leadership, Europe will be increasingly hard-pressed to address the manifold security threats taking a toll on its citizens.

One of the most pernicious effect of Europe’s stasis has been its inability to adjust to the new world order the Obama years foreshadowed. In an age of austerity, the state of public opinion has become a real obstacle as Europe tries to develop the capabilities to shoulder the burden of the complex security challenges we now face.

Sinan Ülgen is the chairman of the Istanbul based EDAM think tank and a visiting scholar at Carnegie Europe.

* * *

Europe has been let down, but still needs the US

Europe cheered for America’s first African-American president. By simple virtue of not being President George W. Bush, President Obama was honored with a Nobel Peace Prize eleven months after his inauguration. With an excess of irrational European euphoria, the President’s legacy was secured.

What is fascinating about President Obama’s foreign policy approach is that it is so similar to Europe’s: It is multilateral, focused on the environment and exudes soft power — be it by working on international trade agreements or providing generous global humanitarian and development assistance.

President Obama was not all that terribly interested in Europe itself.
Despite a shared approach, President Obama was not all that terribly interested in Europe itself. He attended all the right meetings and said all the right things about Europe, NATO and our collective global engagement but something was off. Europe’s doubts and fears were confirmed when the President spoke passionately of America’s pivot to Asia and the new Pacific Century, and Europe suddenly felt relegated to the 20th century.

Still, Europeans didn’t make a fuss — until they urgently needed the help of a more active and engaged U.S. A series of political challenges have weakened the Continent, and suggest America will be required to return to its traditional leadership role in Europe. What is unclear is whether it will.

Heather Conley is senior vice president for Europe, Eurasia, and the Arctic and director of the Europe Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

 

Source:politico.com