A
black president for a small white nation II
Why
Estonia and Obama need each other.
By
Abdul Turay
Published Postimees 14 December 2012
Four
years ago I outraged the nation when I suggested in my first
Postimees article what Michelle
Obama the president's wife might be thinking if Estonia got into
trouble.
“Ah
yes Estonia that small-minded little white nation....to hell with
them.”
That
article was about a fair dialogue between Estonia and black people.
I
am not going to talk about that here, suffice to say progress has
been made, and I have to admit after four years I believe far from
being hostile, Obama will look kindly upon Estonia precisely because
of his African heritage, here is why.
We
have seen Obama appearing to conspire with Russia's leadership at a
nuclear security summit in Seoul, South Korea, March 2012.
“It’s
important for him to give me space,”
he said in a ´hot mike´ moment with outgoing President Medvedev.
The him in question being Putin.
The
foreign policy experts were worried here.
The
leadership of America's traditional allies are worried, they don't
trust Obama.
The
Israeli's feel he is siding with the Palestinians, the British feel
he doesn't like us. He needs us but he doesn't like us. That is what
he means when he said the relationship between Britain and America is
an “essential relationship” rather than a “special
relationship.”
To
understand how Obama thinks one should read what has written about
himself. I have some insight on this because of my background, I
believe what works against Britain and Israel, works for Estonia.
The
theory doing the rounds in conservative circles is what is “wrong”
with Obama is not that he is a socialist but that he is an
“anti-colonialist,” what ever that means.
“Anti-colonialism”
is a rather misleading mash-up of two different concepts,
anti-imperialism and post-colonialism.
Both
terms can be applied to Obama.
Anti-imperialism
just means being against imperialism. You can be right-wing
anti-imperialist. The libertarian right in America is
anti-imperialist.
Post-colonialism
is a left-wing academic theory. Post-colonialism is a theory that
posits that the West, led by America, defines the rest of the world
in a way that is unfair and inaccurate. This definition has been used
as a justification for imperial adventurism most recently in Iraq.
The
stepfather of post-colonialism is the late Palestine scholar Edward
Said who in his book “Orientalism” argued the Orient doesn't
really exist. The concept was invented by 19th
and 20th
Century Western writers, not as a conspiracy, but as part of an
intellectual Foucaultian discourse, which divides the world into them
and us.
Obama
was at Colombia the same time as Edward Said. It is not clear if he
ever took a course with him they certainly knew each other. It is not
difficult to find pictures of them having dinner together.
Moreover
Maria Mälksoo, professor at Tartu University has written that the
Orientalism has been going on here. In other words Eastern Europe
does not exist, even the Baltics does not exist, these definitions
were created by Western writers and don't reflect what the region
actually is.
Dinesh
D'souza, conservative author and film-maker, who made the film “2016
Obama's America” explains what all this means.
“If
you want to know why there is anti-Americanism round the world, it is
anti-colonialism,” he said. On American television.
“He(Obama)
subscribes to an ideology that sees America as the rogue nation in
the world. The whole ship of the world has gone one side up and has
gone one side up because one civilisation the West, America conquered
the rest of the world and stole its stuff.”
According
to D'Souza, Obama wants to make America weaker and poorer to address
this injustice.
“The
world is divided into the oppressors and the oppressed. You have to
put a leash on the rouge element that is America.”
Put
simply from D'Souza point of view, Obama won't defend Estonia because
to so would be an imperial act.
D'Souza
cites as evidence for his theory what Obama writes in his book
“Dreams from my father”.
In
this book, Obama writes that he couldn't have his father so he took
his dream.
Obama's
father fought against the British Empire. In the 50s America replaced
Britain as the main imperial power. Therefore Obama wants America
curtailed.
D'Souza
film was a huge success, but his ideas have been rubbished by the
American media. I think he is on to something.
Obama's
father was a British citizen from Kenya, Obama spend much of his
youth in Asia, his background is similar to mine and for that matter
D'Souza's. And yes, we were all are raised with the same narrative,
which includes post-colonialism and anti-imperialism, even if we
didn't call it that.
This
is where I have an insight. The teenage
Obama of “Dreams from my father” reminds my of my nephew.
Like
Obama my nephew is
growing up with only one parent, like him he is very bright,
opinionated, interested both in politics and culture. He defines
himself by African-American pop culture despite or maybe because of
the fact that he is mixed race. He also continually spouts
anti-imperialist, post-colonial, anti-American rhetoric. My nephew
has reminded me that post-colonialism is part of the DNA of discourse
of all children of the Empire.
D'Souza
may be right in his assessment, but he is wrong in conclusions.
In
the last four years Obama has gotten to know a little about Estonia.
He knows Prime Minister and the President. I can't see why Obama
should be different to any other foreigner, the more he learns about
Estonia the more he is going like it.
Intelligent
people like Estonia because of the warm welcome from the people, the
positively vibe and dynamism, the nature and architectural heritage.
Obama has his own reasons; post-colonial reasons.
Estonia
is post-colonial, it has never been an aggressor nation. Estonia has
always been a victim of aggressor nations.
If
we assume D'Souza is right, countries like Britain, France and Israel
are always going to be bad and essential, countries like Estonia are
always going to be good and non-essential.
But
Obama's task is to stand up for the non-essential, or the
“subalterns” to use the jargon of academia.
A
comment from a student of my stuck me. “20 years ago it was illegal
to be Estonian,” a young person told me.
If
Obama ever heard something like that I have doubt whose side he
would be on.
Obama
vision is for America to be the champion of the oppressed and given
the right information Obama can understand that this narrative can
play out for small white nations as well.
Obama
acceptance speech was very hopeful for Estonia He gave a strong
indication that he will stand up to Putin, if he tries any funny
stuff.
He
began by saying: “Tonight more than 200 years after a former colony
won the right to determine its own destiny, the task of perfecting
this union moves forward.”
In
other words, America was once a colony itself, and it should stand up
for other former colonies.
He
continued: “A nation that is defended by the strongest military on
Earth.”
In
other words, he is not planning to significantly reduce America's
military commitments any time soon.
You
may say that I am reading more into the speech than was there, but I
don't think so.
As
a former speech myself writer, I know that these speeches are worked
on months, in advance and carefully worded. The American president
was talking to his “people” both in America and abroad and after
fours years in office I believe Obama understands that “his
people” may include a small white nation.
.jpg)