Paresh Nath, «The Khaleej Times»
Barack Obama admitiu ao receber o prémio Nobel da Paz em suas realizações ainda eram “poucas”. Mas ao mesmo tempo o Presidente americano tem grandes planos, que incluem a assinatura de um novo tratado de redução de armas nucleares com a Rússia e, finalmente, livrar o mundo por completo de todas as armas atómicas. Senhor de uma capacidade de retórica admirável, em Oslo Barack Obama proferiu um discurso profundo e, ao mesmo tempo, provocante; um discurso de guerra e paz. O historiador Simon Schama, no Financial Times, escreveu que o Presidente esteve ao nível de Cícero; para outros. Tom Heneghan no FaithWorld, escreveu que o discurso de Oslo foi um eco de Reinhold Niebuhr, um teólogo com uma visão sombria da natureza humana. David Brooks no New York Times já teria escrito algo semelhante.
A The Economist escreve que a actual “obsessão” de todos os comentadores é descobrir se o discurso de Oslo reflecte a “doutrina Obama” em política internacional e, nesse caso, qual é essa “doutrina”?
[…] Mr Obama has never claimed to be a pacifist. Yet his critics on the right seemed surprised, pleasantly, when he said in Oslo that “there will be times when nations—acting individually or in concert—will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified.” […]
A presidential “doctrine”, however, needs to say more than that America will sometimes have to fight, and sometimes alone. The question is: when? If Mr Bush had a doctrine it was his belief in pre-emptive war, enunciated in the National Security Strategy of 2002 and enacted in Iraq the next year. Does Mr Obama, who opposed that war, accept the idea of pre-emption in any circumstances? Here the Oslo speech was vague. […]
Sometimes Mr Obama is accused of soft-headed idealism (eg, for extending a tentative hand to Iran and North Korea’s Kim Jong Il, to whom he passed a letter last week), and sometimes of a hard-hearted realism that pays too little heed to human rights. When Iran cracked down on pro-democracy protesters in June, he muted his criticism for fear of disrupting the nuclear talks. His administration has made less fuss than some about human rights in China. […]
So is this a distinctive Obama doctrine? Mr Bush’s officials also talked to North Korea and Iran, and got along well enough with China and Russia. What makes Mr Obama most different so far, argues Peter Beinart of the New America Foundation, a think-tank, is his conviction that an economically stricken America needs to pare down its foreign commitments.
When Mr Obama said at West Point at the beginning of December that he was sending 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan, he also said that he refused to set goals “that go beyond our responsibility, our means, or our interests”. By definition, a superpower has to sally forth into the world. Arguably, Mr Obama’s main new idea, much easier to say than to achieve, is that it should also live within its means.
RJ Matson, «Roll Call»