BERLIN - German political leaders almost never make endorsements in foreign elections, especially in the United States — which has been the country’s most important partner and ally in the six decades since World War Two.
Even when a German chancellor is having serious troubles with a U.S. president and can’t even get the POTUS to accept a transatlantic phone call — as was the case with Gerhard Schroeder in 2002 following his falling out with George W. Bush over the looming invasion of Iraq — they would rather say nothing at all than stray from that tacit but deeply entrenched post-war tradition of staying out of U.S. political campaigns.
So it was all the more surprising on Saturday when Schroeder’s successor as chairman of the center-left Social Democrats, Kurt Beck, opened his mouth and dove into the U.S. race with an unambiguous endorsement of Barack Obama (http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSL07732825). It was simply unheard of. Beck wants to be chancellor in 2009. His SPD is in a grand coalition government with Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats. Abandoning that post-war neutrality is just not something that German leaders do, even if Beck’s SPD is the natural ally of Obama’s Democrats. No one in Schroeder’s administration would have even dreamed of endorsing Senator John Kerry in 2004 even though Schroeder was persona non-grata in Washington after his open and at-times ugly confrontation with Bush over the wisdom of invading Iraq. “There’s no way in hell you’re going to get me or anyone else to utter even one word against Bush,” is how one senior Schroeder foreign policy adviser put it to me in 2004 when I kept asking if they were not at least secretly hoping Bush might not be re-elected. And before Schroeder, no one in conservative Chancellor Helmut Kohl’s administration would have had any official opinion or comment on U.S. presidential races or candidates.
Christian Democrat Kohl, in fact, got on extremely well with Democrat Bill Clinton even though the CDU’s natural ally in the United States would be the Republicans. Kohl went about as far as any German leader would dare go, as far as I’ve seen, in “intervening” in a U.S. race. But his “intervention” was simply meeting Clinton in Wisconsin, rather than in Washington, at a so-called “bratwurst summit” in May 1996, held in that state in part because the German-American stronghold was expected to be a key battleground in the November 1996 campaign.
Click here for more Reuters 2008 campaign coverage.
Photo credit: Reuters/Hannibal Hanschke - Kurt Beck, leader of the German Social Democratic Party (SPD), arrives for a party meeting in Berlin on June 6.
Trackback
8 comments so far
I am pleased to see the endorsment for Senator Obama from Mr. Beck. My choice also.
- Posted by sallyFor all those Democrats who want to vote for McCain, just to ‘punish’ Obama, here is some food for thought.
McCain has made no secret of his intentions to bomb Iran and to stay in Iraq for 100 years. On the latter, Bush is already pressuring the Iraqi government to sign agreements allowing the establishment of 50 permanent US bases in Iraq and granting immunity for US forces. He wants the agreements signed by July.
We have to assume that Bush and McCain have agreed that an invasion of Iran is necessary and imperative. To facilitate that McCain may well bring back the draft.
I hope when you vote for McCain you think about this. Imagine yourself sometime in the next few years standing beside the open grave of your drafted son (or daughter – remember equal opportunity!) as the bugler plays ‘Taps’.
Is that what you want for your children? Will you be proud of your vote for McCain then? Will you be happy that your vote led directly to the death of your child?
Think about it.
- Posted by gulfbridgeIt is interesting that Beck has taken the move of endorsing Obama. However, the endorsements of our own political leaders like Kerry and Kennedy have made very little difference. So it is hard to see how endorsements made by foreign leaders will affect an significant number of voters in the United States during a very serious election year. It seems people are paying attention and making up their own minds.
Jim Buthman, author: America Matters: Why We Should Care!
- Posted by James D ButhmanWhy would a foreign leader endorse Obama? Somehow he has confidence in his foreign policies over McCains. It’s amazing that those not living here can see the obvious superiority of Obama over McCain. Thank you Germany!
- Posted by caliroboWhat happen in US politics affects the world. Obama is the one chosen by almost all European leaders, think about it America, maybe listening this time to Europeans is the right thing to do, it might have avoided unenecessary pain to so much people, uneccessary burden, and avoided so much financial mess. For once open your eyes and look at the way politics is done in some of the best European countries, life is maybe not perfect but definitively more balanced. The US has become like some emerging countries; no middle class, too much t the top, too little and pushing down.
- Posted by AmandineFrom the look of things, it is obvious that Obama will make more friends for america than enemies unlike mcCain; this is a good thing for all americans.
- Posted by peter ogbidiA liberal and a socialist endorsing a liberal and socialist. This is as surprising as Al Gore endorsing Obama.
- Posted by Jiles SamsonWould foreign governments be interested in the US leader that most benefited America, or most benefited themselves? Uh, yeah — themselves. Obama would do just what the EU leaders would love — send the US economy into an accelerated tailspin. Obama’s economic policies are poison to our economic strength. Raise tax rates? It’s been done before, and EVERY single time, the amount of tax revenue collected stays flat! So why raise rates? No matter what the tax rate, tax revenues collected are almost always approx. 19.5% of GDP. So, why not have low taxes instead of high taxes if you’re going to collect the same amount of money? Well, it won’t be the same amount, it will be the same percentage — with low taxes, GDP will grow and you’ll get 19.5% of a large number. With high taxes, GDP will shrink and you’ll get 19.5% of a small number. Why would Europeans want that? Simple — they have wanted to break the American hegemony since the end of WWII. Now, they see their chance — Obama is willing to pander to the voters and give away the store, resulting in a collapsed dollar and the calling of US debt by foreign investors. A nightmare scenario in for US, but not for them! With the USA weakened, the EU will be in a much better position to obtain dwindling natural resources and control more of the world economy. They see Obama as a natural pathway to America’s new role as second (or third) banana. Did you really think they were looking for a leader that would make US and not THEM stronger? Wake up. Even with Iraq, Europe is rather horrified to realize that Bush might actually come out of that war as he expected — with a US presence in the mideast, in a somewhat friendly muslim country (certainly friendlier than Hussein was), with begrudging respect from the majority of the Iraqi populace which will recognize that we sent our men to die there without any imperialist intentions, and with a greatly weakened Al Qaeda, which spent itself outside our borders rather than within. Europe is terrified that that will come to pass (and it’s the direction it seems to be heading in) and that the US influence in that region will be on the rise! That is not what liberal EU leaders want. They want an Obama who will yank our presence out of Iraq (causing that region to plunge into chaos, resulting in greater antipathy to America) and simultaneously destroy our economy (by raising taxes and other naive ideas) and boosting socialism (crushing independent risk taking and reward). Yup, those Euros want Obama — but that sure as hell doesn’t mean we do.
- Posted by Benjaminx