Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Barack Obama’s term as U.S. president is likely to signal a change in U.S.-Russian relations, with U.S. foreign policy emphasizing pragmatism over ideology.
Though Secretary of State-designate Hillary Clinton laid out some basic policy positions in her confirmation hearings – the Obama administration will engage directly with Iran and will close Guantanamo, for example – the details of how the administration will pursue these objectives remain unclear.
President-elect Obama will inherit a number of foreign policy challenges from the Bush administration when he takes office. Key areas where the new administration must focus to reverse the Bush administration's failings include Afghanistan, diplomacy, unilateralism, arms control, and climate change.
Most of the items on the foreign policy agenda awaiting President Obama require global cooperation, including climate change, nonproliferation, and the war in Afghanistan. History suggests, however, that nations are less cooperative during times of upheaval, and the economic crisis – itself a problem requiring multinational action – may hinder the new administration’s ability to find solutions.
The civilian government in Pakistan faces hard choices in its response to the Mumbai attacks. Action against the groups responsible for the violence will overturn traditional strategy that considers these groups national security ‘assets’ against India. There is also the danger of opening up another battle front for an army already conducting counter-terrorism operations on its western border.
One of President-elect Obama’s main foreign policy challenges will be figuring out the proper approach to dealing with Russia. Although ties with Russia have been damaged because of the August Russia-Georgia crisis, Russia, a re-emerged power, is a key player in issues such as Iranian nuclear proliferation and the Middle East peace process.
Despite his campaign promises, Obama’s initial foreign policy might not differ dramatically from Bush’s policies of the last two years. After failures during his first six years in office, Bush has struck a more diplomatic tone in recent years. Obama, who has tapped several Bush administration veterans for his own national security team, is likely to continue on this increasingly diplomatic path.
The objective of Lashkar-e-Taiba, the group which carried out the Mumbai attacks, is global jihad. They are second only to al-Qaeda as a terrorist group of global reach.
Pakistan may be forfeiting its sovereignty if it is incapable of cracking down on militants like those that launched the recent Mumbai attacks. As it appears increasingly unlikely that the Pakistani civilian government will be able to crack down effectively, the international community should intervene to protect Pakistan’s neighbors from the threat posed by Pakistani-based terrorists.
President-elect Barack Obama has assembled a bipartisan, centrist national security team, with an emphasis on pragmatic competence. Already faced with a daunting foreign policy inbox, the incoming administration must formulate a response to the Mumbai terrorist attacks without undermining either the current administration’s credibility or the already-weak Pakistani government.