Choosing novices
I was just reading the introduction to Tony Blair's new book "My Journey," and came across a statement in which he said in effect that it was amazing that the Labor party and then the country chose him as PM, since he had never held any Ministerial office, even at a very junior level. It seems that the west likes to choose new faces at the expense of experience, and sometimes the new face has very little prior experience for the huge job of managing an enormous government bureaucracy. In the US there have been examples of this phenomenon, such as Jack Kennedy, Bill Clinton (who had been governor of a small state, Arkansas), Barack Obama and in the UK, Tony Blair, David Cameron and now Ed Miliband.
There is the mystique of the charismatic young leader, the "passing of the torch to a new generation" etc. etc. But, does it work out? Well, of course it depends on the abilites of the new young leader. I would say with Kennedy, Clinton and Blair it worked, in that they were more effective than expected, but with Obama and Cameron it's too early to say. This is perhaps a sign of vitality of western democratic civilization, that the young voters choose a new young leader to represent them, while in the non-democratic east, there are such leaders as Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, Kim Jong-Il of N. Korea and Ayatollah Khamenei of Iran who are all dying in office.
If we take the case of Barack Obama, it is clear that he has tried very hard to change the direction of the US both domestically and internationally. His healthcare plan was passed, and for all its drawbacks it was a watershed moment in US domestic history. However, his attempt to bully Israel to make a significant concession to the Palestinians has somewhat backfired. He negotiated for months with PM Netanyahu and finally forced him to make a temporary settlement building freeze for 10 months. But, then he was unable to deliver the Palestinians of the West Bank Palestine Authority to agree to negotiate until 9 months of the moratorium had passed. But he didn't consider what would happen then. Netanyahu refused to extend the freeze, since he had made a specific agreement with the US for that time period and he feared his coalition might collapse if he extended it, and Abbas representing the Palestinians has tried to use the freeze to pressure Netanyahu and Obama. Now there is a stalemate of Obama's making. It seems that several of his initiatives have boomeranged on him, mainly because he failed to think through the eventual outcome. Major change is hard, especially if the ideas behind the changes are not solidly based. It is all likely to rebound on him at the upcoming November elections.
Nevertheless, the habit in the West of throwing up almost unknown young and inexperienced leaders makes for greater ferment and change, something the static east can hardly conceive.
There is the mystique of the charismatic young leader, the "passing of the torch to a new generation" etc. etc. But, does it work out? Well, of course it depends on the abilites of the new young leader. I would say with Kennedy, Clinton and Blair it worked, in that they were more effective than expected, but with Obama and Cameron it's too early to say. This is perhaps a sign of vitality of western democratic civilization, that the young voters choose a new young leader to represent them, while in the non-democratic east, there are such leaders as Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, Kim Jong-Il of N. Korea and Ayatollah Khamenei of Iran who are all dying in office.
If we take the case of Barack Obama, it is clear that he has tried very hard to change the direction of the US both domestically and internationally. His healthcare plan was passed, and for all its drawbacks it was a watershed moment in US domestic history. However, his attempt to bully Israel to make a significant concession to the Palestinians has somewhat backfired. He negotiated for months with PM Netanyahu and finally forced him to make a temporary settlement building freeze for 10 months. But, then he was unable to deliver the Palestinians of the West Bank Palestine Authority to agree to negotiate until 9 months of the moratorium had passed. But he didn't consider what would happen then. Netanyahu refused to extend the freeze, since he had made a specific agreement with the US for that time period and he feared his coalition might collapse if he extended it, and Abbas representing the Palestinians has tried to use the freeze to pressure Netanyahu and Obama. Now there is a stalemate of Obama's making. It seems that several of his initiatives have boomeranged on him, mainly because he failed to think through the eventual outcome. Major change is hard, especially if the ideas behind the changes are not solidly based. It is all likely to rebound on him at the upcoming November elections.
Nevertheless, the habit in the West of throwing up almost unknown young and inexperienced leaders makes for greater ferment and change, something the static east can hardly conceive.
posted by Jack Cohen at 9:52 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home