The Bush Presidency Worries Europeans

George W. Bush will likely be weakened from the start by the circumstances of his election. In and by itself, this is a cause for concern among Europeans. We do not like U.S. presidents to be too strong, because that might lead them to be overbearing. But we do not like them to be too weak, either, since when U.S. foreign policy is too dominated by constant domestic infighting, U.S. policies concerning Europe become uncertain and sometimes unreliable.

Still, the U.S. Constitution and political system are strong, and Europeans generally feel that the new president should be able to govern normally. This will be the case if he governs with the support of the more moderate Republicans and Democrats, on the model he followed as governor of Texas. This is something that in any case he must do given the slim Republican control of both houses of Congress, which could make partisan policies hard to pursue. So there is hope on this front.

But he also must set himself free from the most partisan circles within his own party. In this, it must be said that Bush comes in with a reputation. It may not be apparent to Americans that he is chiefly known in Europe for his enthusiastic support for the death penalty. Click on your computer on “peine de mort” or “hinrichtung” (“death penalty” in French and German) and you will be astonished to see the many European nongovernmental organizations and private citizens that are deeply concerned with this topic and how much it colors their image of America.

Diplomatic protests by European governments every time an execution is planned are a reflection of these feelings. A visit to Europe would strongly confirm this. You would watch frequent critical TV ads over this issue, concerning the U.S. in general and Texas and its governor especially. The fact that in Texas the governor’s right of pardon in death penalty cases is extremely limited is little known. Europeans hear Bush expressing emphatically his support for the many executions that Texas has conducted since he became governor, or for the unprecedented number that have taken place in his state this year. Such enthusiasm for such a large number of executions coming from a newly elected president of the U.S. calls into question of shared values between Europe and America. As the threat from the East has disappeared, the need for common standards on both sides of the Atlantic has become more crucial to our relationship. The death penalty will therefore have a growing bearing on transatlantic relations.

On the other hand, Bush has now decided to appoint Condoleezza Rice as his national security advisor and to nominate Colin L. Powell as secretary of State. That two African Americans are thus elevated to the two top positions in the U.S. domain of international relations is widely taken as a hopeful sign in Europe. Most observers think that this may show an ability to go beyond the bigotry that now affects certain sectors in the president-elect’s party, and to reach out to groups outside the GOP’s habitual supporters.

Beyond that, there continues to be a certain amount of bewilderment in Europe over the ability of American politicians to become president of the U.S. after a remarkably short period of preparation. This is hardly new: The election of Presidents Carter, Reagan and Clinton came as a surprise to most European leaders--these men were completely unknown among the general public in Europe when they launched their presidential election campaigns. Americans give lesser prominence to foreign policy in judging the ability of their prospective leaders than do Frenchmen, Britons or Germans, and that is a traditional cause for concern in Europe. This election is special only inasmuch as the gap between the candidates was perceived as being very wide indeed. Vice President Al Gore’s credibility seemed so much higher than Bush’s that the latter’s election might have been rendered doubtful should a similar contest have taken place in a large European country.

On the other hand, President-elect Bush’s entourage is both familiar in Europe and known to be highly competent. These are the people who negotiated Germany’s unification inside NATO and the soft collapse and disappearance of the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union. They are the ones who managed the international coalition that helped the U.S. oust Saddam Hussein from Kuwait in 1991.

These impressive achievements give heart to the European allies, even if they do not alleviate a certain form of unease concerning the president-elect that took root a year ago, when Bush, during a TV interview, found himself unable to convincingly answer or dismiss questions concerning foreign leaders. On the prospective ability to handle international affairs, it is fair to say at this stage that the future administration scores higher with allies than does its leader. The message from Europe is a cautious one: Time will tell.