USWarning to the Palestinian Authority: According to a document sent by Washington to the Palestinian Authority and obtained by Haaretz on Friday, the Obama Administration will assign blame and take action if indirect talks fail due to one side’s fault. After clearly stating Washington’s position for “a viable, independent and sovereign Palestinian State with contiguous territory that ends the occupation that began in 1967″, the report continues:
We expect both parties to act seriously and in good faith. If one side, in our judgment, is not living up to our expectations, we will make our concerns clear and we will act accordingly to overcome that obstacle.
Our colleague Bevan Sewell of the University of Nottingham and Libertas is a leading young scholar on US foreign policy in the 1950s and 1960s. Taking some of the lessons from that research, he looks at the foreign policy prospects of the new American President:
The rapid rise of Barack Obama to the White House has been accompanied by desire among leading commentators to find an appropriate historical analogy. The number one comparison so far has been between Obama and John F. Kennedy, President from 1961 until his assassination in 1963, who also rose to prominence at a comparatively young age. As early as 2007, Ted Sorenson, Kennedy’s leading speechwriter and one of his closest advisors, anointed Obama as a successor. In February 2008, William Rees-Mogg of The Times wrote:
[Obama] has built up an excitement such as no candidate has created since President Kennedy in 1960. He is, in my view, a better speaker than Kennedy. Like Kennedy, he combines personal magnetism with a strong appeal to American idealism.
Yet, beyond the immediate imagery of youthful leaders, accomplished speakers, and forceful men regenerating America politically, what do these analogies actually mean? Can any worthwhile comparison be drawn, or is this just the search by contemporary commentators for populist appeal? Read the rest of this entry »
UPDATE: A senior Obama administration official told CNN late Saturday that Chavez had asked Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to consider the return of US and Venezuelan ambassadors to their posts in Caracas and Washington. The official endorsed the initiative, “This is a positive development that will help advance U.S. interests. And, the State Department will now work to further this shared goal.”
No doubt, we will now have lots of media frothing about Obama’s appeasement of Latin America dictators through displays of courtesy, rather than, say, slapping Chavez across the face with a white glove and ripping the book to shreds. Already Newt Gingrich, who apparently was once a Republican Congressman, has made the magic link between smiling at Chavez, bowing to Saudi King Abdullah, and giving a loving kiss to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:
Behind this flapping, there is one of the major foreign policy stories of this Administration. In sharp contrast to the macho posture taken by George W. Bush and his advisors — which failed to overthrow Chavez and alienated many in Latin America as new governments emerged from Bolivia to Ecuador — Obama’s White House has decided to exert influence through discussion and partnership. Even before this handshake, a new Washington had accepted referenda in Bolivia and Venezuela that bolstered the Morales and Chavez Governments.
And, of course, there are the gradual steps being taken by Obama to ease the US isolation of Cuba, as well as his Friday declaration that “the United States seeks a new beginning” with Havana. Indeed, this may be Chavez’s inadvertent contribution to American “engagement”: by grabbing the media hot lights with his book presentation, he has taken criticism away from Washington’s tip-toeing but still significant approach to a relationship with the former #1 Latin American Bad Guys.
Whatever else is said about Barack Obama, you cannot accuse him of being slow off the mark. A day after the Inauguration, he issued the order closing the Guantanamo Bay detention camp and CIA “black sites” and ending torture by American agencies. Two days later, he revoked the Reagan directive banning funding for any organisation carrying out abortions overseas. On 26 January, he ordered a new approach to emissions and global warming, as the State Department appointed Todd Stern to oversee policy on climate change.
USWarning to the Palestinian Authority: According to a document sent by Washington to the Palestinian Authority and obtained by Haaretz on Friday, the Obama Administration will assign blame and take action if indirect talks fail due to one side’s fault. After clearly stating Washington’s position for “a viable, independent and sovereign Palestinian State with contiguous territory that ends the occupation that began in 1967″, the report continues:
Comments Off 
The rapid rise of Barack Obama to the White House has been accompanied by desire among leading commentators to find an appropriate historical analogy. The number one comparison so far has been between Obama and John F. Kennedy, President from 1961 until his assassination in 1963, who also rose to prominence at a comparatively young age. As early as 2007, Ted Sorenson, Kennedy’s leading speechwriter and one of his closest advisors, anointed Obama as a successor. In February 2008, William Rees-Mogg of The Times wrote:
UPDATE: 
Entries (RSS)