United by Fear and Hope
By The Honorable John C. Kornblum

Europe trembles. George W. Bush's election victory seems to deepen the differences between the United States and its allies. Under these circumstances, where can we find common ground ? Will the U.S. and Europe drift even further apart? Is unilateralism now the official foreign policy of the United States?

Everything is possible. We can also hope that things will improve. To protect their own interests, it is essential that Europeans try harder to understand why Bush succeeded. A careful analysis can reveal causes much different than one might expect.

According to opinion polls, most American voters show very little interest in hegemony or preemptive foreign policy; a majority of Americans even want closer cooperation with America's allies.

In his campaign, the president for the most part ignored such issues. He had another goal. He aimed to portray himself as the protector of the nation. To reach this goal he continually repeated a simple theme: "The world is dangerous but I will remain strong and resolute and I will guard the core values of the Unites States."

Not the economy, not health care and not even necessarily Iraq moved voters toward Bush. A diffuse amalgam of complex emotions influenced their choice. According to polls, the two most important reasons underlying the pro-Bush mood were the desire for personal safety and the wish to be given answers to the muddle and complexity of the 21 st century.

In other words: fear and hope. Fear of new threats from terrorism, rogue states and even fear of the consequences of technological change, globalization and demographic developments. Fear of the loss of values and the erosion of the family; fear of uncontrolled immigration and fear of getting old.

But hope too. The hope that faith and values could save a threatened world, taken over by technology and societal alienation, and humanize it again.

Bush articulated this theme more successfully than Kerry did. His topics were perhaps more facile, and he consistently avoided directly addressing the problems and mistakes of his administration.

But his messages connected with the voters. Despite Iraq, despite an increasing polarization within his own country, enough Americans accepted Bush's message to afford him a second term.

Here lies a ray of hope for Europe. Perhaps one truly did misunderstand the Americans. The yearning for safety and religiosity was interpreted by many Europeans as an attempt for world domination. If the exit polls are reliable, most Bush voters had other ideas. They were hardly interested in the complex details of politics. They were seeking ideas that could serve as guideposts for a better future. In this respect, Kerry's programmatic speeches tended to confuse, not enlighten. In 2004 Americans seem to yearn for an active defense, underpinned by moral values that can support them in the search for clarity in a bewildering world.

Do Europeans want something else? Did European politicians act differently when they fulminated against war and unilateralism? In their own way, European politicians reflected the same needs that Bush stands for in America. The goals are similar. Only the methods are different. Americans want actions. They do not gain a sense of confidence from a European-style "peace process."

However, when it concerns fear and hope, Americans and Europeans are united. Fear prevails on both sides. They need hope. They want clarity. Shouldn't it be possible to achieve this goal together?

. ..............................................................................................
This essay originally appeared in German in Der Tagesspiegel on November 8, 2004. It appeared in the November 12, 2004 AICGS Advisor, translated from German by Sarah Fichter. For the original German version, please click here.

................................................................................................
The views expressed in this article are those of the author(s) alone. They do not necessarily reflect the views of the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies.