U.S. presidential inauguration

After Obama-mania, serious challenges remain -- profs

Economy, war in Iraq present major obstacles to change as presidency changes hands

People around the world will be watching to see if President Barack Obama can turn his message of change into action. Photo: Greg Weston

The inauguration of U.S. President Barack Obama is being portrayed as the start of a new era of change, but many political scientists say significant challenges may limit the new president's ability to follow through on his promises.

"It's going to be euphoric," says Reginald Stuart, professor of history and political studies at Mount Saint Vincent University. "There's just this sense of celebration, especially among black people, of course, but among many Americans on this 'change'. His whole campaign was like a social movement."

While the desire for change helped deliver Obama to the White House, many practical barriers exist that could prevent him from achieving his goals.

"The global economy is in crisis," says Donald Naulls, associate professor of political science at Saint Mary's University. "Twenty to 30 per cent of the developed countries' wealth has just simply disappeared overnight. How do you resolve that? I don't know."

The U.S. Congressional Budget Office is projecting a government deficit of more than US$1 trillion in 2009 and unemployment rates continue to rise, which could limit the scope of Obama's actions.

"The focus is going to be on the economy -- it has to be," Stuart says. "He needs a strong economy with tax revenues coming in to move on the question of health-care reform, as one example. The economy is really a key to this. It's going to underpin so much else."

As a result, Obama's reforms to health care, social security and education could be forced out of the spotlight as the economy takes centre stage.

"Just like the war in Iraq absorbed 90 per cent of the attention of the Bush administration, so will repairing the economy absorb 90 per cent of the attention of the Obama administration," says Brian Bow, assistant professor of political science at Dalhousie University.

Bow says the economic meltdown, combined with a Democratic Congress, will result in an American protectionism that could further strain foreign relations, another area Obama hoped to change after the Bush years.

"A lot of countries will say ‘you were going to be nice to us, that was your big promise and you're killing us on trade.'"

U.S. stuck ‘in limbo' in Iraq

Obama will also face barriers in his plan to withdraw all American troops from Iraq by the summer of 2010, which Bow says was not a realistic goal.

"I think in practice it's just impossible. Nixon proved that better than anybody because he was seriously committed to getting out of Vietnam as soon as he possibly could, but it's hard to do that without having the consequences be really bad. I think they'll be stuck in limbo that way for quite some time," he says.

Stuart agrees Obama's stance on Iraq may prove unfeasible.

"They're going to be there for quite awhile," he says. "If he does pull out willy-nilly and then there's some big eruption, the Americans are going to carry the can for that."

The United States would still have significant development and diplomatic activities in Iraq, even after a complete military withdrawal, says Naulls.

"Saying you're going to take the troops out doesn't mean you're simply going to pack up and leave. There are other ways and means and there are lessons, I think, out of the reconstruction following the Second World War."

Obama also promised to close the infamous Guantanamo Bay prison. Stuart says that could be easier said than done.

"There's still the question of what do you do with these people who are there? Where do you take them? How do you proceed? So closing the base is fine and I think a good gesture, but the problem remains," he says.

Vague message of change could be asset

But there are certain conditions that will help Obama effect change. Naulls says the ambiguity of Obama's message of change could now act in his favour.

"I'm not sure that he was too specific on what kind of change was going to occur. So, in effect, as president he can say anything that he does is change."

Stuart suggests the economic downturn could allow for greater reforms than would have otherwise been possible, just as the Great Depression led to Roosevelt's New Deal.

"He's probably got a reasonably compliant Congress to deal with as well. So that may well play in his favour," Stuart says. "No president can manage all of the promises that he or his people make up."

Comments on this story are now closed