EUROPEANS, LIKE MUCH of the rest of the world for that matter, are following the U.S. presidential election campaign very closely. Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, and even Mike Huckabee have all pretty much become household names across Europe. Newspapers, magazines, blogs, and TV and radio stations are providing daily coverage of the various party debates, primaries, and caucuses and have now even begun to delve into arcane details governing the potentially decisive impact of superdelegates on the Democratic race.
The reason why so many Europeans are captivated by and invested in the outcome of the campaign is simple. They are pretty much on the same page as Democrats. After eight years of George W. Bush–whose two terms in office most Europeans would summarize as a complete disaster dominated by the Iraq war, Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, and opposition to the Kyoto Protocol, coupled with weird evangelical-religious fervor–there is great hope that the next president will deliver some much-needed “change” in America’s domestic and foreign policy.
In the spring of 2007, for example, German public opinion polls revealed that 48 percent of respondents viewed the United States (that is, the Bush administration) as a bigger threat to world peace than Iran. Among those aged 18-29, that figure stood at some 57 percent. Against this backdrop, it should come as no surprise that a vast majority of Europeans, especially in key EU countries such as Germany, France, and Britain, want a Democrat in the White House next January.
Back in 2004, opinion polls indicated that more than 80 percent of all Germans would have voted for John Kerry. And with around 10 percent of the European non-vote, Ralph Nader garnered twice as much popular support as the incumbent George W. Bush, who came in last with around five percent. These dramatic polling figures reflected opinion in most other European countries as well. It should be added that the Democratic take-over of Congress following the 2006 mid-term elections was greeted enthusiastically across Europe. After letting Bush steal the 2000 elections and returning him to office in 2004, Americans had finally come to their senses–or at least that was the view in Europe.
European media and big chunks of public opinion are now gripped by “Obamania.” A few weeks ago, Germany’s weekly Der Spiegel ran a cover story featuring a black-and-white photo of Barack Obama under the headline, “The Messiah Factor: Barack Obama and the Longing for a New America.”
Indeed, there can be no doubt that a President Obama would represent the most dramatic conceivable break with George W. Bush and the widespread European perception that America has turned into a trigger-happy rogue state run by a fundamentalist Christian nut job. In electing a young black politician with a Muslim father, Americans would do something that is pretty much unthinkable in any country in Europe, where politics are traditionally dominated by a white old boy’s club (notable exceptions like German chancellor Angela Merkel notwithstanding). In this context, however, Europeans must not forget that Obama (despite having a very Europe-savvy foreign policy team) is not known to be an Atlanticist.
Senator Clinton, for her part, has many European admirers dating back to her time in the White House with Bill, who remains a very popular figure in Europe. European women are particularly supportive of her, a fact that mirrors Clinton’s last remaining bastion of support in the primaries–white women over 50. If not for the sudden, meteoric rise of Obama, it is safe to say that a vast majority of Europeans would be rooting big time for Clinton.
Senator McCain, too, would represent a clear break with several of the Bush administration policies that Europeans find particularly egregious. He would close Guantanamo, ban the torture of U.S. detainees, and, most important, would get serious about the fight against global warming. Furthermore, the decorated war veteran is strongly committed to NATO and knows that European support is crucial in confronting “the transcendent challenge of the 21st century,” radical Islamic extremism. At the same time, McCain’s stay-the-course-in-Iraq attitude and his rather aggressive rhetoric vis-à-vis Iran and Russia have caused concern on the other side of the Atlantic.
And who would European leaders prefer to see win on November 4? With McCain, they would certainly have the toughest possible guy in the White House, someone with strong, virtually unshakeable, foreign policy convictions. The folks in Paris know that McCain is a foreign policy heavyweight compared to the junior Senator from Illinois. Though Obama enjoys superstar-type global media appeal, those like the ever eager Sarkozy may calculate that Obama’s inexperience and lack of gravitas will open up more space for “la grande nation” on the international stage. Chancellor Merkel probably does not have much of a preference–not even for Hillary; after all, in politics, women leaders are rarely a good match. On climate change, the one issue that Merkel is really passionate about and that would allow her to score important political points at home, all three candidates are very promising. As for the Brits, Prime Minister Gordon Brown would probably have a more difficult time with McCain given his hawkish foreign policy positions.
In the meantime, young UK conservative opposition leader David Cameron, like other European leaders-in-waiting, is left pondering how he can emulate (Hillary Clinton would say “Xerox”) the stunning success of Barack Obama’s “Change We Can Believe In” campaign.
Ulf Gartzke is a contributor to THE WEEKLY STANDARD blog.
