Obama seems strangely aloof from America’s historical allies in Europe. He bows to Saudi Kings while snubbing British and Russian Prime Ministers alike. And now he has taken a major step, endorsing the inclusion of India as a permanent member (with veto power) on the United Nations’ Security Council.
Why would this be in America’s interest? It could be argued India is a counterweight to China and a superior trade and cultural partner because of its democratic norms. But this, while probably true, ignores countervailing factors, India’s long flirtation with leftism, anti-Americanism, and other troublesome beliefs. Further, permanent security counsel members with veto power only make it harder for the US to get anything done in the UN; the occasional Chinese and Russian vetos there are reminders of how dubious the “world community” is for ensuring security globally, and additional vetos will only make things worse.
America’s interests are secondary here. For Obama, India matters because it’s a rising Third World power, and such countries are his natural area of interest. I believe what I wrote last year explains the real motive for this dramatic gesture:
Obama’s heart is in the Third World. In the 1980s when he was in college, he was inspired by anti-apartheid politics and movements for domestic nuclear disarmament, not the heroic Contras of Nicaragua or the Poles of Solidarity. As he said in Dreams of My Father regarding a post-college trip to Europe, “[B]y the end of the first week or so, I realized that I‘d made a mistake. It wasn’t that Europe wasn’t beautiful; everything was just as I‘d imagined it. It just wasn’t mine.” And love of the Third World, the Third World of his father’s national socialist Kenya, is the ideology of the Third World nonaligned movement. The Nonaligned Movement was led by countries like India, Indonesia, and Brazil to forge a new, independent socialist destiny. It viewed the Cold War as an act of quasi-imperialism, which diverted attention from the Third Worlders’ nationalist interest in expropriating wealth from First World businesses and their interest in gaining independence from the influence of both the United States and the Soviet Union. As Obama said in Cairo, “More recently, tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a Cold War in which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations.”
Back when he thought America was rich, Obama wanted an $800B foreign aid package to the Third World. It’s obvious he’s treating our country and its people like a conquering hero, but the people for whom he’s conquering and the people whom he is most loyal to are not Americans, unless perhaps black Americans are involved. His ultimate loyalty is to a broad swath of worldwide people he deems “oppressed,” and he deems us, the ordinary European American majority (as well as ordinary Europeans, themselves) as the oppressors. This is a completely unsuitable and dangerous worldview for an American president.