Posted by Kyle Atwell in
US Domestic and Cultural Issues on Tuesday, July 29. 2008
We your Editors have received some reader emails this week that express concern we are writing about Obama too much, McCain too little.
I tend to agree Obama is covered disproportionately on AR, but I think it is important for people to realize that our main objective with AR is to identify key articles in the media, and respond to them -- the source of our problem is the fact that the media as a whole is biased toward talking about Wonder Boy Obama, and so our pool of content is limited as it is.
We are not a news organization, but a blog that responds to news. Subsequently, our disproportionate coverage of Obama reflects the media's disproportionate coverage of him. The scant coverage of McCain is not limited to our website. In fact, it seems the biggest news on McCain this week is that he is complaining about nobody wanting to write news about him. And he is correct.
In comparing Obama and McCain’s media entourages during Obama’s trip abroad last week, the Globe and Mail found that:
Trailing in [Obama’s] charismatic wake was a whole legion of the top stars of the U.S. press corps. All three news anchors of the big networks were with him... And back at home, during what was undeniably Obama Week in American journalism, when Mr. McCain touched down on a campaign stop in Manchester, N.H., there was... but one lonely local newsperson to witness the arrival of the other nominee.
However, McCain has not always been on the losing side of media bias. Steven Chapman from Real Clear Politics makes the simple observation that the media is fickle; one day’s rock star can be old news--or no news--the next:
Continue reading "Here is Your Article on McCain: There are no Articles on McCain!"
Posted by Nanne Zwagerman in
Transatlantic Relations on Monday, June 23. 2008
Thomas P.M. Barnett has a column in the Knoxville News Sentinel in which he reports on the mood of government officials in the Netherlands. There are a lot of interesting angles in the article -- for instance on McCain's 'League of Democracies', which the Dutch do not appreciate, and on European worries about trade rhetoric by Obama, which would be overblown as Obama is pivoting to the centre faster than the eye can see.
These, however, are the article's key paragraphs:
But here's what I found during my week in The Hague: the Dutch aren't convinced that America plus Europe translates into a quorum that's sufficient to tackle all the challenges we collectively face.
In almost every issue you can name, Europe's coming to the conclusion that the West needs the East to figure out the South, as well as our shared future on this increasingly crowded and competitive planet.
It should be borne in mind that the Dutch are one of the most atlanticist nations of Europe in their outlook. Public thinkers from the States like Barnett quite frequently get an ear from the Dutch government. Yet, they have gone global. The Dutch - and the Europeans in general - do not see the 'west' as sufficient anymore, either in terms of its power or in terms of its legitimacy.
Posted by Joerg Wolf in
Transatlantic Relations on Wednesday, June 11. 2008
President Bush's current trip to Europe has been described as a "farewell tour" in quite a few newspapers, which I find a bit surprising. I thought there would be plenty of reasons and opportunities for George W. Bush to visit Europe in the remaining seven months of his presidency.
Does that sound as if I already miss President Bush? Charles Hawley writes in Spiegel International that the German media will miss the "climate killer":
Germany never much liked George W. Bush. But he was able to unite Germans. Hating the US president was about the only thing the country could agree on in recent years.
Related Atlantic Review post, which encouraged a debate with 53 comments: "Europeans Mourn End of Bush's Presidency"
William Drozdiak, president of the American Council on Germany, opines in the IHT that Europeans ignore Bush and are "anticipating a new age of enlightenment in trans-Atlantic relations":
As President George W. Bush embarks this week on a farewell tour of Europe, he should not be surprised by the lack of interest in his trip. Like most Americans, Europeans are looking past Bush.
Whether Barack Obama or John McCain moves into the Oval Office, Europe is anticipating a new age of enlightenment in trans-Atlantic relations as NATO nears its 60th birthday. While there are ample reasons not to let expectations get too high, both candidates espouse policies that could greatly enhance cooperation among leading Western democracies.
The phrase "a new age of enligthenment" is a bit too strong, but otherwise I agree with Drozdiak. Once Obama or McCain is inaugurated and asks for more troops for Afghanistan, we will start to miss George W Bush, who was the "perfect excuse" for the lack of burden sharing.
Kurt Kister wrote in the respected German newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung that the presidential elections (esp. an Obama victory) would mark a new beginning for Americans, but that would not be the case in Europe and Asia: "The memory about Bush will overshadow the image of the US throughout many years in the future". In reference to the Sueddeutsche Zeitung's headline, the Atlantic Community asks: "How Long is Bush's Shadow?" Pretty long, I would say.
Posted by Kyle Atwell in
US Domestic and Cultural Issues on Saturday, May 17. 2008
The California Supreme Court made a 4-3 decision this week that will legalize gay marriage in California, most likely effective within 30 days. As reported by the New York Times:
This decision will give Americans the lived experience that ending exclusion from marriage helps families and harms no one,” said Evan Wolfson, executive director of Freedom to Marry, who noted that same-sex marriages were legal in Belgium, Canada, the Netherlands, South Africa and Spain.
The timing of this action, coming only months before the US presidential elections in November, have led to speculation on whether or not it will hurt the Democratic nominee. Alex Altman wrote an article in Time Magazine asking, “Will Gay Marriage Help the GOP?”:
California Republicans are hoping that history will prove instructive. After Massachusetts became the first state to codify marriage equality in 2003, the G.O.P. spent the ensuing general election wielding the issue as a potent weapon. Thirteen states passed ballot initiatives to ban same-sex marriage — including Ohio, the battleground that tipped the 2004 election in George W. Bush's favor. Opponents of gay marriage in California have generated more than 1 million signatures to place on November ballots an initiative amending the state's constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage.
Kai Stinchcombe, a PhD candidate in political science at Stanford University, and a very good friend of mine, created the popular Facebook group Gay Marriage Killed the Dinosaurs. In his thoughtful analysis, Kai identifies 17 reasons gay marriage should remain illegal:
Continue reading "California: Today Gay Marriage, Tomorrow Meteors and Volcanoes"
Posted by Nanne Zwagerman in
US Domestic and Cultural Issues on Wednesday, April 30. 2008
Oil prices are on the up and up, setting new records at the pump. Each time this happens, a spate of panicky reactions in national politics, all isolated from each other, burst up. First, a brief look at the state of the debate in the USA:
In the USA, McCain has proposed reacting to the higher oil prices by temporarily cutting taxes. This is in keeping with the Republican solution to everything -- cut taxes. Hillary Clinton has jumped on the McCain tax cutting train, hoping to draw more contrasts with Barack Obama. Meanwhile, Obama finds himself in the same camp as George W. Bush in opposing a symbolic tax holiday. A few paragraphs from the New York Times, via Drezner:
At a meeting with voters in North Carolina on Monday, Mr. Obama said lifting the gas tax for three months would save the average consumer no more than $30, a figure confirmed by Congressional analysts. Mr. Obama has previously dismissed Mr. McCain’s proposal as a “scheme.”
“Half a tank of gas,” Mr. Obama told his audience. “That’s his big solution.”
President Bush’s spokeswoman essentially sided with Mr. Obama in saying that tax holidays and new levies on oil companies would not address the long-term problems of dependence on foreign oil.
Dana Perino, the White House spokeswoman, said gasoline prices were “entirely too high, but I think it would be disingenuous and unfortunate for American consumers for them to be led to believe that there is a short-term fix.”
Continue reading "Global Oil Panic: The United States of America"
Posted by Nanne Zwagerman in
US Foreign Policy on Saturday, April 12. 2008
Having long secured the GOP nomination, John McCain has had plenty of opportunity for tacking back to the centre. It was to be expected that he chose to do precisely that in a recent foreign policy speech. In doing so, he has however angered the conservative wing of his party, as a Cliff Kincaid piece on GOPUSA demonstrates:
[I]f the liberals get beyond their differences with McCain on Iraq, they will not only vote for him but promote his agenda as president. Then, as Rush Limbaugh notes, it may eventually be possible to change the name of the United States of America: "We'll call ourselves New Europe." In the process, true conservatism as a political force will be finished in the U.S.
The tragedy of this approach is that it comes from a man who served his country in uniform and risked his life on behalf of the U.S. McCain would have been a natural choice to lead a campaign for restoration of American sovereignty in foreign affairs. He could have been "The American President Americans have been waiting for." The piece, called 'McCain's Incoherent World Order' reveals yet another split in the Republican party: between sovereignists, or as Steve Clemons disparagingly calls them, 'pugnacious nationalists', and neoconservatives. McCain's politics are a choice for neoconservatism. Although McCain downplayed it in his speech, he still seems eager to go on foreign adventures.
The lesson McCain has drawn from the Bush administration is not that the neoconservative agenda of aggressive democracy promotion is wrong, but rather that the unilateral manner in which this was executed -- through Bush' 'coalition of the willing' and defiance of international law such as the Geneva conventions -- has been both unhelpful and wrong. Principles and pragmatism tend to coincide in McCain's politics. Partially because of that, though, it is difficult to see how he could bridge the gap with liberals with regard to Iraq.
Related posts in the Atlantic Review:
• Neocons and Pragmatists Compete over Influence on McCain
• 40th Anniversary of Senator Fulbright's "Arrogance of Power" Speech
Posted by Joerg Wolf in
US Foreign Policy on Thursday, April 10. 2008
The so-called pragmatists in the Republican party are concerned that Senator McCain "is susceptible to influence from the neoconservatives," write Elizabeth Bumiller and Larry Rother write in the New York Times (HT: Alex).
John McCain has long made his decades of experience in foreign policy and national security the centerpiece of his political identity, but he might not be "as fully formed on foreign policy as his campaign advisers say he is:"
While he speaks authoritatively, he operates too much off the cuff and has not done the deeper homework required of a presidential candidate.
In a trip to the Middle East last month, Mr. McCain made an embarrassing mistake when he said several times that he was concerned that Iran was training Al Qaeda in Iraq. (The United States believes that Iran, a Shiite country, has been training Shiite extremists in Iraq, but not Al Qaeda, a Sunni insurgent group.) He repeated the mistake on Tuesday at hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee.
Related post on Atlantic Community: Why We Should Fear a McCain Presidency
And on Dialog International: John McCain a Danger for Europe
Posted by Editors in
Transatlantic Relations on Thursday, March 27. 2008
 Senator McCain has spoken out in favor of a free trade deal with the European Union, building on the North American Free Trade Agreement, writes DW World: "I think to head a free trade agreement with the European Union would be a great thing to happen."
The presidential candidate also declared in a major foreign policy speech at the World Affairs Council in Los Angeles:
The United States did not single-handedly win the Cold War; the transatlantic alliance did, in concert with partners around the world. The bonds we share with Europe in terms of history, values, and interests are unique. Americans should welcome the rise of a strong, confident European Union as we continue to support a strong NATO. The future of the transatlantic relationship lies in confronting the challenges of the twenty-first century worldwide: developing a common energy policy, creating a transatlantic common market tying our economies more closely together, addressing the dangers posed by a revanchist Russia, and institutionalizing our cooperation on issues such as climate change, foreign assistance, and democracy promotion.
Anatol Lieven, however, warns in the Financial Times that Europe should fear a McCain presidency. (Hat tip: Detlef).
Related posts in the Atlantic Review:
• John McCain's League of Democracies
• Republican Candidates on Europe
• Standing up for moral values in the war on terrorism
Posted by Nanne Zwagerman in
Transatlantic Relations on Sunday, March 23. 2008
Senator and presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain has repeated his calls for a 'league of democracies' in a Financial Times op-ed directed at Europe.
We need to renew and revitalise our democratic solidarity. We need to strengthen our transatlantic alliance as the core of a new global compact – a League of Democracies – that can harness the great power of the more than 100 democratic nations around the world to advance our values and defend our shared interests.
At the heart of this new compact must be mutual respect and trust. We Americans recall the words of our founders in the Declaration of Independence, that we must pay “decent respect to the opinions of mankind”. Our great power does not mean we can do whatever we want whenever we want, nor should we assume we have all the wisdom and knowledge necessary to succeed.
The words about respect and trust are welcome. However, the idea of a leage of democracies is also likely to run into some opposition among America's European allies. The reasons McCain gives for his league of democracies, both in the FT and in a May 2007 speech reported on in the Washington Post, have much to do with America's perceived national interest. On issues like confronting the 'turn towards autocracy' in Russia, 'acting where the UN fails to act' on a problem like Darfur and providing 'unimpeded market access' to open market democracies, continental Europe has completely different perceived interests.
Continue reading "John McCain's League of Democracies"
Posted by Joerg Wolf in
Transatlantic Relations, US Domestic and Cultural Issues on Saturday, March 1. 2008
Ulf Gartzke, a visiting scholar at the BMW Center for German and European Studies at Georgetown University in Washington, writes that many Europeans are captivated by and invested in the outcome of the US presidential election campaign:
In electing a young black politician with a Muslim father, Americans would do something that is pretty much unthinkable in any country in Europe, where politics are traditionally dominated by a white old boy's club (notable exceptions like German chancellor Angela Merkel notwithstanding). In this context, however, Europeans must not forget that Obama (despite having a very Europe-savvy foreign policy team) is not known to be an Atlanticist. Senator Clinton, for her part, has many European admirers dating back to her time in the White House with Bill, who remains a very popular figure in Europe.
According to Gartzke, McCain would be good for Europe as well:
Continue reading "A European View of the US Election Campaign"
Posted by Kyle Atwell in
Transatlantic Relations, US Foreign Policy on Thursday, February 21. 2008
There has been speculation on both sides of the Atlantic about whether America’s next president will be able to revitalize the acidulated transatlantic partnership. Con Coughlin has captured a common sentiment in an op-ed published by the Telegraph:
Whether it is a Republican… or one of the two remaining Democrat contenders… none of them will arouse anything approaching the level of controversy and hostility that has been caused by President George W Bush's seven-year tenure.
President Bush has certainly been a divisive figure, both in policy and style. However, it is hardly a foregone conclusion that there will be a panacea in transatlantic relations once Bush decamps. As suggested by former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger in a recent interview with Spiegel Online, transatlantic differences run deeper than one administration:
SPIEGEL: Isn't German and European opposition to a greater military involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq also a result of deep distrust of American power?
KISSINGER: By this time next year, we will see the beginning of a new administration. We will then discover to what extent the Bush administration was the cause or the alibi for European-American disagreements. Right now, many Europeans hide behind the unpopularity of President Bush.
Kissinger brings to mind a good question: has European hostility toward the US been solely the response to poor leadership by Bush, or is there a more fundamental schism in the Alliance?
Crispin Williams weighs in at Social Europe Blog, arguing that Bush has left a scar on transatlantic relations that will not easily heal:
Continue reading "Are Europeans Hiding in the Bush, or is Transatlantic Panacea to Come?"
Posted by Sonja Bonin in
Transatlantic Relations, US Foreign Policy on Friday, February 15. 2008
As much as many Americans are looking forward for policy change, Europe is hoping for a multinational foreign policy under a new administration in the United States. In an article addressed to our "Dear Americans", former German chancellor Helmut Schmidt asks (in German; following translation and editing by Sonja Bonin) what Europe can expect from the next US president:
How do you intend to end the war in Iraq and what should Iraq look like afterwards?
What is your goal in Afghanistan? Eliminating just Al-Qaeda or the Taliban as well? Establishing democracy?
Should Al-Qaeda evade to Pakistan for good, perhaps even gaining access to nuclear weapons, would you military intervene?
What is your strategy for a peaceful solution of the decades-old conflict between Israel and its Arab neighbors? Will you support the establishment of a Palestinian state?
What is the future US policy regarding Iran?
Continue reading "US Presidential Candidates: Who's Good for Europe?"
|
or 
:
Latest Comments
So do you go to Citgo instead, David? ;) To enrich Hugo Chavez, I mean. Best [...]
Don S about Obama the Atlanticist?
Oops, here is the link to Fred Barnes I mentioned [...]
Don S about Obama the Atlanticist?
Fred Barnes points out that the tilt of Obama' major cabinet appointments thus far is [...]
microgod about Obama the Atlanticist?
General James L. Jones was everywhere: Vietnam, Near East, Iraq, Afghanistan. Very [...]
David about Obama the Atlanticist?
The appointment of Susan Rice as UN ambassador is also significant. Obama has [...]
David about Obama's Wish List for Europe
The northeast is covered with Lukoil filling stations. I try to avoid them since I'm [...]