American Idol: The rise and rise of Obama

In capitals across the world, among friends and foes of America alike, an impression has gained ground in recent months: that a star has been born. Soon enough, Barack Obama, the man who has been filling arenas from the blue east coast to the conservative deep south of America and all the way to glitzy Los Angeles, could be the man the whole world has to deal with.

His advantages are obvious. His candidacy has in itself revolutionized the political arena. He is part African; has had a Muslim father; holds a Harvard law degree and is a devout Christian: things which, for the most part, do not go together in the American consciousness. At a time when the American people have been driven to (premature) despair, Obama had little trouble finding people to jump on to his bandwagon of "change".

Barack Obama is a brilliant man. In an election year wherein most Americans were looking back fondly to the Clinton years of plenty, Obama outplayed the Clintons at every stage of the game. He teamed up with John Edwards in early November to launch an offensive on Hillary, each time choosing to hold himself back just enough to give the impression of being the "conscientious dissenter" from her opinions and letting Edwards look like the nasty guy who was being mean to a woman. Once Clinton lost her aura of invincibility, Obama's scorched earth policy in Iowa won the day. All the way upto "Super Tuesday" aka Feb 5, when 22 states held primaries simultaneously, Hillary kept looking for the knockout punch to throw Obama out of the race, while the latter focused on arithmetic; the fact that winning all the smaller states would negate Hillary's lead in the big ones. In effect, Obama realized that while the US Presidential campaign is hardly about every state in the union, securing a party nomination can be about all 50 states. Obama won nearly all the caucus states as well as the Texas Caucus; a feat which utilized his superb campaign organization to the hilt.

Brilliant men can also be dangerous. From the very beginning, Obama chose to position his rhetoric midway between the shrill anti-Bush screams from the Left and Hillary's level headed approach that utilized facts and proposals. Obama chose to speak in open ended sentences; caring only to sketch his ideas for the benefit of his "fans". He stays away from important Senate votes, such as the one on Iran's revolutionary guard and promises to "talk" to the Iranians, if elected. In agreeing to "talk", he appeals to the basic sense of fairness of his people, but refuses to provide more detail, since the American people might not want to hear how he would indulge in "give and take" with a rogue nation. He doesn't promise to "solve" problems, but instead promises to make them "go away". That is what the American people want to hear; they want to hear that they can escape to some parallel universe where it can be 1946 all over again, with the US placed ahead of the world in everything. Unfortunately, there are hardly any solutions to the geopolitical and economic crisis that looms large on America's future and those solutions are certainly not easy, even if they exist. Barack has managed to sell a pipe dream as a "vision" and in doing so he has enlisted legions of younger and first time voters. Young people always want to "save the world" and when it is so easy to save the world as to vote for Obama, it becomes the fashion... the rage, like the latest pop album number. That apart, Americans are addicted to religion and Obama has played this no end. It is circulated that Obama finds time for Bible Study on his campaign plane and oftentimes, he goes down on his knees to speak to God. Despite these cheesy details, Obama refuses to wear a US flagpin on his lapel, ostensibly to show that he believes in solutions and not in symbols. The fact that a publicly announced departure from a somewhat standard mode of dressing for US politicians is in itself a grand symbol seems to have escaped most people.

Hillary's basic scheme was to play to the gallery and win friends by promising them the stuff they said they wanted. Obama extended the idea; he promised some of the stuff they asked for and convinced them they did not really need the rest. For Obama's fans, he is not the man who gives them what they want, but a genuine prophet who also knows what is best for them.

On the world stage, Obama comes across as a sort of mystery. If elected, he is likely to remain so. It is improbable that he will address foreign policy issues other than those which elicit immediate reactions at home. Obama is the kind of person who would like to make grand gestures; it is even possible he will reach out to Cuba. Policy issues such as US' relations with the EU, the proximity of Russia and Israel, the ascension of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the expansion of NATO into Eastern Europe; will probably stay in the background. Closer home, Obama is likely to stick to the cliched bogey of non proliferation and lack enthusiasm over the nuclear deal. In the long run, this should not be much of a problem, since the US offer seems to get better every day (think of how the deal that Jaswant Singh was negotiating with Strobe Talbot compares to the one that is currently on offer); what is to say that the next decade might not bring a dream deal to the table; especially since an alliance with India is becoming a more and more pressing policy imperative with each passing year.

And here is a final thought that I have always wanted to share: As part of an obvious political gimmick, there is a race among US politicians to blame the "Big Corporates" for everything. The slogan is that these "Big Corporates" must be cut down to size, since the horrible things that are happening to the middle class on the housing and health front "shouldn't be happening to Americans". That argument is a travesty: The middle class did not build America; the big corporates, the military, the industry, the scientists and innovators did. That is what made America No. 1. The American middle class was only lucky enough to find itself in the midst of these outstanding people. And if Americans really believe in individual success, they should focus on distinguishing themselves rather than hoping for government freebies.