RSS

When the results of today’s US midterm elections are announced, it’s safe to say that Republicans will be poised in 2011 to assume control of the US House of Representatives, have considerably weakened the Democratic majority in the Senate, and have captured at least 60% of Governorships across America – handing President Obama and his party an overwhelming rebuke of their leadership since January, 2009. 

The consequences of this turnover for US domestic policy remain to be seen – the fates of healthcare reform and financial services regulation are still to be left to the regulators – and issues such as comprehensive energy legislation and immigration reform are not likely to be addressed in any significant and comprehensive manner until 2013. But what about the consequences of such renewed Republican legislative leadership on US foreign policy?  

The developments of this election cycle have left Europe a bit bewildered, perhaps even concerned about a Republican political triumph and the prospects of a Carter-like, one-term mandate for the Obama Administration. Two years ago, Obama’s sudden political rise and his subsequent historical election delighted those countries that had considered his predecessor to be the primary source of all evil. Admittedly, over the past 18 months his popularity has varied: Within the EU, some members (especially in the East) are feeling rather less enamored, while others (especially in the West) have become at least more skeptical.

But on the whole, Obama has remained the first newly-elected US president since the end of World War II with whom Europeans have liked to identify themselves – a “citizen of the world” in his own words. In 2008, they religiously listened to what he said, and awaited the “miracles” that were expected to follow in 2009.  On the strength of these expectations, he was rewarded with an early Nobel Peace Prize. 

In light of today’s election results, however, Europeans will now have to listen to what is said (by Democrats) less carefully, and watch what is done (with Republicans) more closely.

To wit, on the agenda for 2011 are several bilateral trade initiatives heretofore neglected by an increasingly protectionist Congress, including US trade agreements with Korea, Columbia, and Panama. The President’s interest in enhancing the trade agenda will be confirmed by the Administration’s focus on the recently announced National Export Initiative – a worthy but difficult goal, made all the more challenging by two years of a neglected trade policy. Trade issues (and related concerns over a so-called Currency War) will also be the focus of the November 20 EU-US Summit, where much emphasis, too, will be placed on economic governance, and coordinated fiscal policies.  In a moment of Congressional transition, the December 17 meetings of the Transatlantic Economic Council (TEC) in Washington will also be a forum for renewed debates on the elimination of non-tariff barriers and cooperation on the development and innovation of green technologies – debates that will be pursued well into 2011 and beyond.  

Fiscal rigor is now, as such, the de jure theme both at home and abroad. This is not only an age of uncertainty; it is also an age of austerity. With the tea-partiers watching the vaults, money will be scarce for the job fairs of the past two years, especially as tax cuts force ill-defined spending cuts. (Note, however, that in the absence of a major geopolitical problem, the economy should continue to improve with each side eager to take the credit after having spent the past years refusing to take the blame.) 

In this regard, Tea Party or Tea Party-sensitive members in Congress should not be overlooked. In a closely divided legislature, their views contribute to Congressional action on US trade policy, nuclear arms treaties, the unfinished wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the Middle East peace negotiations, as well as US relations with international organizations such as the UN (wherein climate change and Iran, to name a few, play a key role).

Although the Tea-Party movement lacks any cohesive position on foreign policy issues, its gains in 2010, and its influence for 2012, may, at least indirectly move the Republican Party away from its more traditional internationalist center and more towards an isolationist path – the most likely and near-term example being in complicating efforts with the prompt ratification of the strategic arms treaty with Russia. 

In this regard, the White House may face renewed pressure to strengthen sanctions against Iran and ask the President for more tangible short-term results – not to mention support for Israel, thereby allowing the Israeli government to exert more autonomy vis a vis Iran, as well as on and within the Palestinian territories. Moreover, such an influx of Republicans in Congress might make Israel more confident about US support should they decide to take the military option into their own hands – especially if, as expected, the final UN report on the assassination of Mr. Harrari is cause for renewed violence in and from Lebanon.

Republican gains in Congress, however, may have the short-term result of solidifying support for the war on Afghanistan. War management has not been a truly contentious issue and Obama will be allowed to begin his gradual withdrawal in July 2011, even as the withdrawal from Iraq proceeds on schedule even as domestic conditions worsen and violence rises.  Funding for a comprehensive missile defense system will also be strongly supported despite potential Republican differences with the Administration on logistics, such as location of bases and interceptors. 

Half-way through Obama’s first term, therefore, the Republican “New Look” for the next two years will likely be mixed – a bit of continuity here, a bit of change there, and much adversarial wrestling. During a series of high profile international missions starting this week, Obama will take time-out from Washington and its travails to cultivate new and better personal relationships for much-needed partnerships.  As he does so, European leaders would be well advised to reach-out to the US president and listen to US political realities more closely than has been the case during the last two years.

Alexis Serfaty is Director of Policy for the European-American Business Council.  He is based in Washington, DC. 

Related Articles:

• Nikoloas Kirrill Gvosdev: The Tea Party's Jacksonian Instincts
  
• Rüdiger Lentz: A Sea Change in US Politics
• Editorial Team: The Limited Power of Presidential Popularity