Like most American commentators, German reviewers gave President Obama high marks for his inaugural address, even if it disappointed by not matching the great speeches of John F. Kennedy and Franklin Roosevelt. The speech was rich in substance, however, and i have noticed how people keep coming back to it to point out specific points that represented a break with the Bush era.
Writing in the Sueddeutsche Zeitung, Stefan Kornelius picked up on the theme of responsibility, which Obama evoked throughout his address.
ebenfalls bei einer Amtseinführung vorgetragen: Frage nicht, was dein
Land für dich tun kann, frage, was du für dein Land tun kannst. Mit
diesem Aufruf zur Verantwortlichkeit gibt Obama die Last des Amtes
zurück an die Wähler, er verteilt die Aufgaben auf viele Schultern, und
er gibt der amerikanischen Politik eine neue Richtung vor. (Responsibility is Obama's short-hand for the famous phrase of Kennedy, which has also delivered in an inaugural address: ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country. With this call for responsibility, Obama shifts the weight of his office back to the voters, he distributes the tasks at hand to many shoulders, and he puts American policy on a new course.)
Nina Baumann in Focus was struck by the somber tone of the speech:
Obamas Antrittsrede war mehr vom Ernst der Lage geprägt als von Jubel
und Triumph. Hatte er schon in seiner Rede in der Wahlnacht
die Nation auf die Herausforderungen eingestimmt, vor der das Land
steht, so standen diese bei der „Inaugural Address“ noch stärker im
Vordergrund.( Despite the euphoric mood of the millions in Washington, Obama's inaugural address was characterized more by the seriousness of the situation than by triumph and celebration. Already in his speech on election night he warned the nation of the challenges ahead, and this was even more pronounced in his inaugural address.)
Christina Neuhaus in Die Welt points out the phrases that are off-putting to European ears, which, however are virtually mandatory for any incoming US president:
Er sagt dabei etwas, das in Europa völlig vermessen
klingt und das sich eine Angela Merkel oder ein Nicolas Sarkozy nie
auszusprechen trauen würde: „Wir sind immer noch die wohlhabendste,
mächtigste Nation der Erde.“ Später in der Rede heißt es über die Ideale der
Gründungsväter: „Diese Ideale erhellen noch immer die Welt.“ Amerika sei
„wieder einmal bereit zu führen“. Das mag hierzulande arrogant klingen. Doch
es ist Balsam auf Amerikas krisengeschüttelte Seele. (Then he says something that sounds quite presumptuous in Europe and that neither Angela Merkel nor Nicolas Sarkozy would ever dare to say: "We are still the wealthiest and most powerful nation on earth." And later, on the ideals of the founding fathers: "These ideals still light the world" America is "once again prepared to lead." These phrase may sound arrogant here, but they are balm for the crisis-ridden American soul.)
Her colleague at Die Welt, Bettina Röhl, has a unique take on Barack Obama and his inaugural address. In her hit piece US Praesident Obama: Schwache Antrittsrede! ("Weak Inaugural Address!") Frau Röhl heaps scorn on Obama, his speech, and her colleagues in the German media:
Man kann nun nicht einfach jeden Ton, den Obama lässt, in einen
Geniestreich umfunktionieren. Man erinnert sich, dass eine Sarah Palin
über Wochen von den Medien ins Kreuzfeuer genommen und politisch
examiniert wurde und regelmäßig durchfiel: aber der Künstler der
Plattitüden, der großen, schönen und gewaltigen Plattitüden, Barack
Obama, segelt als Intellektueller glatt durch, ohne getestet zu werden.
Die heutige Rede brachte nichts Neues und Obama spulte sie auch,
relativ zu diesem einmaligen Anlass, vergleichsweise uninspiriert
einfach so ab. (You can't twist every tone that Obama emits as a work of genius. Just recall how Sarah Palin was attacked in the media week after week and always failed each policial test, but the artist of platitudes, the great, beautiful, powerful platitudes, Barack Obama, easily sailed through as an intellectual, without ever once being tested. Today's speech didn't offer anything new, and Obama delivered it without any inspiration in spite of the enormity of the event.)
Elsewhere, Frau Röhl complains that, as a man commtted to peace, Obama is a threat to the world order. It is only by threatening military force that America is effective as a world leader. In fact, Israel never would have attacked Gaza if John McCain, rather than Obama, had been elected.
Finally, back in the reality-based world, Bernd Pickard in the Tageszeitung, recognizes that the speech signaled a welcome break from the policies of the past eight years:
früherer Reden anklingen – den amerikanischen Traum, das Versprechen
von gleichen Aufstiegsmöglichkeiten, das er selbst verkörpert. Aber für
Obamas Verhältnisse, und für die Standards präsidentieller
Antrittsreden, hält sich der neue Präsident auf den Stufen des Capitols
mit Pathos zurück. Obama weiß, dass er selbst Geschichte genug ist. Da
braucht es vielleicht nicht die eine Zeile, die Generationen in
Erinnerung bleibt. Allerdings gibt Obama ein ganz großes Versprechen:
Das einer Zeitenwende und der Wiederaneignung der USA durch jene, die
die noblen Seiten der US-amerikanischen Idee verkörpern - im
Unterschied zu denen, die noch bis Dienstag in Washington regierten.
Selten war eine Antrittsrede eine so unversöhnliche Abrechnung mit der
Vorgängerregierung. Selten auch wurde der Moment so herbeigesehnt, da
sich der Vorgänger in den Hubschrauber verabschiedet. (Obama echoes themes of earlier speeches: the American dream, the promise of equal opportunity for advancement, which he himself embodies. But by Obama's own standards, and those of past inaugural addresses, the new president on the steps of the Capitol toned down the pathos. Obama knows, that he made history just by standing where he did. He didn't need that one line that would be remembered by future generations. On the other hand Obama made one momentous promise: the promise of real change and the re-appropriation of the US by those who represent the noble aspects of the American idea – in stark contrast to those who governed in Washington until Tuesday. Seldom has an inaugural address been such a consequential reckoning with the preceeding administration, seldom has a moment been more welcome than when the predecessor left by helicopter.)
0 comment
Thanks Dave for the Deutsche Presse & Medien roundup re: the President’s inaugural address. What is important for you and your readers to understand regarding the speech is that the vast majority of the German people who were glued to their TV sets ‘Got it’___ they understood much of what Obama was trying to express to the American people and to the world. And you know what? Die Deutschen are still raving about the inauguration days after the event.
On the European political scene there is not one politician that is even close to President Barack Obama’s worldwide appeal. That fact alone is what is ‘freaking out’ so many EU politicians, journalists, columnists, and news commentators. The desire to lead the world via a unified European vision has again been trumped by America.
Wish you were here, you would love it. I’ll add your roundup to my next update post at Jewels. Auf wiedersehen bis später.
Hi,
I am not sure what BRE’s point about American power as a counter-point to the European process means. I can’t imagine Eurocrats feel “threatened” by the US, especially since American encouragement led to European regionalism in the first place.
Anyway, Obama’s speech received justifiable plaudits. Nevertheless, I have never been moved by speeches calling for civic responsibility. JFK’s call to “get America moving again” sounds great in hindsight–if you forget the fact that, attendant to the vision, he deliberately escalated the Cold War when an accommodation with the USSR was very possible. Similarly, Carter’s “malaise speech,” which explicitly asked Americans to “work harder,” must have disgusted Americans already working very hard at their jobs as well as in other life-spheres.
The fact is, Americans are no more or less “virtuous” than anyone else in the developed world. We give where we can, we participate in the political process where possible. Mostly we mind our own business.
It’s just that we don’t get much help. Fancy notions of what it means to be a good American aside, we want the government to help us attain the material plenty that we expect in the twenty-first century. The problem is, our government is so poorly-designed racked and with inertia that,
A) it does not provide the goods that people demand, creating a case of market failure; and,
B) its weakness has enabled undemocratic political actors (the neoconservatives, the lobbies, etc.) to determine political outcomes that nobody wanted.
We don’t need any more civic engagement in this country. We need results, results, results.
Your long-lost son,
Cliff
Dear Clifford,
If you have the time read some of the articles (new and archived) at Spiegel Online International that deal with transatlantic relations and the special coverage of the US elections 2008. If Der Spiegel’s journalists and columnists are to be believed and if they have a grasp of the politics and public opinion in Germany and across Europe, then there was plenty of ‘Angst’ and feelings of dread and intimidation by the USA during the 8-year administration of President George W. Bush. But that was not my point in the comment above…
What has the politicians and pundits buzzing over here is the overwhelming popularity of this new U.S. president in their own respective countries combined with images of 1.5 million+ Americans gathering on a cold winter morning to witness his inauguration with great joy and jubilation.
The Europeans do not have anything to match the power of this euphoria and these images in the coming months and years from a political point-of-view___ unless there are some surprises lurking out there in the ether that no one is expecting like the fall of the Berlin Wall in ’89.
When Obama asks for more cooperation and support on global issues and crisis from America’s European partners and allies, how can the EU and EC leaders say NO without looking selfish and hypocritical and looking after their ‘national interests’?
The ongoing meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels over the Guantanamo detainee issue is a good example. Let’s see if the Europeans can come up with a unified position on accepting non-violent Guantanamo prisoners on their own soil after all of the Hell they have raised about its legality and abuse of human and civil rights.