It could have been WORSE.
But in all seriousness, the ball is now in the Republicans' court (or at least its back to half court). Shadow Government seems to think Obama will respond by focusing more on foreign affairs and they will be a major issue in 2012. Maybe, but Obama is far too careful and pragmatic to stir the pot too much in the foreign policy arena. It is unlikely foreign issues, rather than domestic ones, will draw the attention of the electorate.
Stephen Walt largely backs my theory. There are simply not a lot of things that the Congress can do in the next two years to substantially alter foreign policy. Obama could take some drastic actions, but again who thinks that is likely to happen? Walt notes that Afghanistan and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict will remain the main issues Obama focuses on. I'm pessimistic about any President's ability to bring about peace in Israel; that will probably take a generational shift in the Israeli government and a decision on its part to come to a final settlement with the Palestinians. Afghanistan is the real thing to watch. In two years it could be going very well or very poorly, in both cases the US will be heading for the hills as quickly as possible. If it remains in the neutral 'somewhat good/bad' category (as I suspect it will), it will probably be shunted to the periphery in 2012.
Finally this article notes what issues the new Congress may be able to come together on. Anti-war democrats and isolationist tea party republicans will advocate a withdrawal from Afghanistan. They might be able to agree on cuts in Defense spending. Other areas of cooperation could include reforming foreign aid, reducing agricultural subsidies, and limiting earmarks. Now, I don't necessarily agree with all of these policies, but I would be pleasantly surprised if the new congress was able to come together on these issues. The pessimist in me worries that we are in for 2 years of legislative gridlock.
No comments:
Post a Comment