Obama in Berlin: Terrorism is a Global, Not National, Challenge
Barack Obama's speech to the people of Berlin on July 24 placed terrorism alongside other dangers that have been enabled by the global "closeness" of the post-Cold War world. In his speech, terrorism, environmental degradation, global traffic in drugs and nuclear materials, and human security were all framed the same way, as challenges that all nations have to face cooperatively.
A week later, Eric Egland reminds in a New York Times op ed that the US and Europe already cooperate: "We already have a counterterrorism partnership with the European Union. And it works. Indeed, despite news media caricatures of aggressive Americans feuding with pacifist Europeans, both groups are quite serious about protecting citizens by working together."
Nevertheless, it is new to approach counterterrorism as a supra-state global issue.
Gore in 2000 also understood that security threats must be dealt with globally in the post-Cold War world. His view, and Obama's in 2008, differ from the conventional view that security is intrinsically a state issue. In the 20th century, the only way that two states might take responsibility for each other's welfare was through alliances and pacts. In our time, media and transport and finances link us across borders, forcing us to take responsibility for each other, whether we pledge allegiance or not.
I liked the speech, and the way it ranked terrorism as one of a number of threats that face us. That description, instead of over-the-top characterizations of Al Qaeda as an existential threat, reflects the way the world really works. Although Obama is widely perceived as an idealist, in this particular area, he displays a realistic grasp of the security environment.
The current Administration, oddly enough, appears less realistic, despite the strong talk and military approach to counterterrorism. John McCain sounds nostalgic to me, in his wish that border control could solve terrorism, as if we could just shut our doors, pretend that globalization had never happened, and be done with the world outside when it proves to be threatening.
Of course, a potential attack on American soil threatens American citizens. But we'll more effectively reduce the potential of a serious attack with a globalist, rather than nationalist, approach. As Obama put it in Berlin, "The poverty in Somalia breeds the terror of tomorrow." We may think that poverty in Somalia is not our problem. If so, we should probably think again.
This framing could renew the moribund coalition by always pointing out we all have a stake in the security of imperiled states, such as Afghanistan. From Berlin, Obama:
This is the moment when we must renew our resolve to rout the terrorists who threaten our security in Afghanistan, and the traffickers who sell drugs on your streets. No one welcomes war. I recognize the enormous difficulties in Afghanistan. But my country and yours have a stake in seeing that NATO’s first mission beyond Europe’s borders is a success. For the people of Afghanistan, and for our shared security, the work must be done. America cannot do this alone. The Afghan people need our troops and your troops; our support and your support to defeat the Taliban and al Qaeda, to develop their economy, and to help them rebuild their nation. We have too much at stake to turn back now.
For more on Obama's trip, also see:Obama's Globetrotting: Campaign Funded or Senate Junket? | Barack Obama in the Middle East