FYI, fellow Americans: Europeans who care about maintaining close ties with the US administration are starting to get worked up over the likelihood of a no-show by President Obama at the May EU-US Summit in Madrid.
There may be many reasons for the White House to consider skipping this pow-wow, but most of them are probably purely domestic - reinforcing among populists that the President is totally focused on economic matters, job creation, etc. None of which are unimportant matters.
But as the New York Times' David Sanger reminded us today, there is a direct correlation between American economic standing and its ability to wield power in the world. "In the world," that Vietnam era GI phrase to mean everywhere other than their soggy rice paddy, is where we live, and everything from deficits to crude oil to climate change links Americans to everyone else, whether they are Chinese, Africans, or Europeans.
Yes, by all means cancel the Bush era Moon/Mars boondoggle, where money was to be borrowed (more deficits) on a whimsical return to manned Moon exploration, leading perhaps to Mars "colonization." Meanwhile, back on Earth, the colonization that we really need to be concerned about is that which is going on in the West Bank. Which brings me back to the US-EU Summit.
Here's what I wrote in Euractiv today:
- - - - - - - -
When Israel-Palestine merits not a word from a president, you know the United States is turning inward.
Roger Cohen on the SOTU, New York Times, 28 January 2010, “Exit America“
The same Cohen op-ed indicates that only nine minutes were devoted to international affairs in President Obama’s first State of the Union message last month. And now we hear about how intra-EU wrangling over which of its several “Présidents” will shake Obama’s hand first at the US-EU Summit may mean that none of them will get to do so - if the US President doesn’t attend.
Sorry, folks, this just won’t do. Adult leadership is required on both sides of the Atlantic if the warring parties on the shores of the Eastern Mediterranean are ever to be encouraged to make peace.
It’s not a problem that needs more time - Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and its siege of Gaza have lasted the better part of a half century. 90 years ago this month, in February 1920, the “powers” were meeting in the Conference of London - one of a series of conclaves to divvy up the defunct Ottoman Empire - and we know how that turned out.
Last month, a few days before the SOTU speech that ignored the Israel-Palestine situation, I chaired a panel in Brussels that looked at the unsatisfactory state of Western efforts to bring about a lasting peace. Despite the hope this time last year (Inauguration of Obama, his appointment of George Mitchell), the anniversary of the Israel campaign against Gaza reminds us how little has changed, except that Israel now has a government bent on expanding its settlements throughout the West Bank and Jerusalem. But in our conference, what was clear was that both sides of the pond needed to keep each other engaged.
The United States remains Israel’s primary security guarantor, and
the European Union’s financial assistance allows the Palestinian
Authority to remain in business. It would appear that the US and the EU
have many things to talk about, and might want to better coordinate
their use of what should be considerable leverage with both parties to
the conflict.
What better way than to end the “egotistical wrangling” over lining up to shake hands? And for the US, to use the EU-US Summit to show Europe that the Obama Administration is not going to “go local.”
