Why the Election Mattered

Barack Obama's campaign, meanwhile, was characterized above all by disciplined intelligence. From his painstaking organization during the primaries, to his selection and management of highly capable subordinates, to his sobriety and judiciousness throughout, he displayed precisely the qualities the Bush administration has lacked. Like all great politicians, Obama is something of a blank slate onto which admirers project the qualities they wish to see, not all of which may actually appear in the crunch. Still, it is telling that not just idealists and visionaries expect him to be their champion. So do large numbers of technocratic professionals in and around government, who are eagerly awaiting not only the passing of many hapless Bush appointees but their replacement with first-rate public servants.

This respect for professionalism, more than any fetish for bipartisanship or general desire to maintain continuity in sensitive areas, is what led Obama to consider asking Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to stay on in the new administration. For Gates symbolized better than anybody else the Bush team's belated recognition that competence matters. As the defense analyst Noah Shachtman described Gates's appeal in 2008, commenting on the Obama camp's publicly expressed interest in him, "since Gates has been brought in, things have started to turn [at Defense]. Budgets have begun to return to reality. People lose their jobs when they can't do them right. Experts in their fields are being heard. Sound policy is often trumping adherence to political orthodoxy. And the Pentagon is slowly, slowly starting to focus on today's wars in Afghanistan and Iraq."

The implications of such an approach to U.S. foreign policy more generally will be interesting to watch. Those expecting immediate or dramatic change are likely to be disappointed (or relieved, depending on their perspective). The new administration will deploy more hopeful and soothing rhetoric, play better with others and quickly adjust policy on a few high-profile issues with primarily symbolic importance (banning torture, taking steps to close the detainee camp at Guantánamo Bay, etc.). But it will continue to prosecute operations in Iraq (at least for a while), pursue the "war on terror" (under a less bellicose heading) and cheerlead for globalization. At first glance an Obama administration, like many of its senior staffers, will look like the Clinton administration on a particularly good day, minus the soap opera.

Despite what many will argue, however, this will actually be cause for celebration rather than concern, since the global situation confronting the incoming Obama administration will not be uniquely perilous. Yes, the United States is stuck in difficult conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. But other new presidents have been dealt weaker hands in more significant wars (think of Eisenhower and Nixon). Yes, Iran is moving toward nuclear weapons. But nuclear proliferation has been one of Washington's major headaches for six decades. And yes, the Russian bear is growling. But today Moscow poses a nasty regional problem, not a world-historical global one. Even the economic and financial crisis, as serious as it is, will not call into question the future of capitalism or trigger revolutionary upheavals in major countries the way the Great Depression did.

Though it's unfashionable to say it, the basic framework of contemporary global politics is actually in relatively decent shape (at least from a long-term perspective) and is likely to remain so for years to come. The United States remains the planet's dominant power, and most of the other major powers are its democratic allies. Research shows that economic, social and political development are linked and mutually reinforcing, meaning that the tides of modernity flow in the direction of liberalism. And even with the current economic crisis, large areas of the world are growing steadily and offering progressively better lives for ever-larger shares of their populations.

Precisely because he is so smart and pragmatic, Obama is likely to recognize that his central challenge is to right a listing ship of state and get it moving forward again—rather than to chart some fundamentally new course. And as he does so, the impressive returns on good seamanship will gradually become apparent.

Since the new administration will have to clean up various inherited messes and do so in highly straitened circumstances, its initial accomplishments may appear underwhelming. But the essence of prudence is avoiding unnecessary trouble, so many of its true successes will be notable less by their presence than by their absence. And since so many contemporary problems can only be managed or contained rather than solved, critics will always have plenty to complain about. But just as the Bush administration proved to be a lesson in the bad things that happen when public policy is not taken seriously, so an Obama administration may well become an ongoing lesson in the good that can happen when it is. And if that's how things work out—if Obama's style is matched by substance—then his presidency might almost live up to the extraordinary hype accompanying its arrival.

Rose is the managing editor of Foreign Affairs.

© 2008