The election of a person with the name of Barack Hussein Obama -- not an Anglo-Saxon or Western name -- as president of the United States signifies an unprecedented historical change in the world's most powerful and richest country.
No doubt that, after his inauguration, Obama's first priority will be to save the U.S. economy from its free fall. There are also other major and urgent issues, such as universal healthcare and redistribution of income (not wealth), that have to be changed so as to favor the less privileged. If he is supported by the U.S. Congress, his policies will hopefully change the performance -- and mentality -- of the people. Hopefully.
How can he change the nation's conduct in international relations? After the demise of the Soviet Union in the 1990s and the United States became the world's only superpower, the concepts and activities inherent in Realpolitik ideology should have been considered outmoded.
Realpolitik is defined as: "A usually expansionist national policy having as its sole principle advancement of the national interest" (American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language).
It was enunciated by Bismarck in the second half of the 19th century when Europe's contending powers were more or less comparable to each other. The present situation is different. We have one superpower and a number of significant contenders, including Europe, emerging China, India and Brazil and a re-emerging Russia. The present U.S. administration must have realized that applying the Realpolitik concept has even induced Russia to be increasingly belligerent and the political/security situation in Europe may deteriorate unnecessarily.
The superpower's limits are obvious. Even with NATO's reluctant assistance, it has not been able to end the war in Iraq (which it started) with the possibility that Iraq may break into three parts. It has not been able to resolve the war in Afghanistan, which has now spread into Pakistan with the danger of destabilizing this country that possesses nuclear weapons.
In addition, the United States has been willing to accommodate the "axis of evil" powers of North Korea and Iran, despite all talks about unleashing large-scale military actions. It's extensive efforts to help reach a solution in the Middle East have not borne fruit. Finally, the limitation of its power means other regions, including Latin America, have been neglected. Latin America has now become much more independent of its northern neighbor -- which in the context of multilateralism is a good thing.
But international relations have been complicated further by the emergence of nonstate actors -- and this has proven more difficult for the only superpower to deal with. Al-Qaeda has not been vanquished and the present administration seems to now be willing to talk to Afghanistan's "good" Taliban -- a reversal from its initial position when these groups were considered terrorists and evil.
It is with this background that the new U.S. administration could re-evaluate the basis of its policies toward other countries and peoples. The election of Barack Obama has signified to the rest of world how open-minded the U.S. people are, and that they are hoping for a radical change. This has greatly increased their goodwill and trust toward the United States under its new leadership. Let the future policies of the new administration -- which must consider and take into account the interests and perspective of others -- continue to increase this goodwill and trust in order to become a truly respected world leader.
The United States does not need to sacrifice its national interests in formulating its policies and actions toward other countries. However, if it applies the concept of Realpolitik in its policies and actions, it will only divide the world as it has been doing in the past.
First, the United States should try to understand what the specific grievances of the various relevant countries and peoples are.
Since democratization has spread to many -- including developing countries (there are very few exceptions, such as North Korea, Myanmar and Zimbabwe) -- the opinion and demands of the people have increasingly become more relevant in the decision-making process in these countries. The United States, together with other well-meaning countries, should take the lead in showing that the superpower is now upholding the interests of the world as a whole in order to attain peace and prosperity for the people of the world.
Along with itself, the United States should invite other major powers to change their mode of thought that up to now has been based on the concept of Realpolitik in dealing with others, and instead should seek collective solutions which are best from the whole world's point of view.
Where national interests are not diametrically opposed to each other, reconciliation should be pursued. But this coalition -- let us call them "world-oriented" countries -- would have to be decisive in freeing the oppressed and exploited people from their governments or rulers. The era of autocracy and exploitation should end.
The Obama administration could start by modifying the use of Machiavellian Realpolitik concepts as the basis of policies and actions to one based on the interests of the world as a whole. This would be a real change for everyone. It would inevitably need to be done in a gradual way, and a start could be made in the forum of the UN Security Council.
With his personal traits, different mode of thinking and mentality and the opportunity given by the U.S. people to initiate change, President-elect Barack Obama may even be able to change the course of the world.
The writer is a retired United Nations staff member residing in Jakarta.
