Yet there is a considerable change with era Bush

For the first time in almost thirty years, last March, the Chairman Barack Obama speaking, beyond the Iranian people, the leaders of the Islamic Republic. In a clear break from his predecessor, the new American President was tense hand policy and was thus an end to the concept of an axis of evil which aligned the Iran of the mullahs, Saddam Hussein's Iraq and the Korea of North of Kim Jong-il in the same hatred. As if the power of persuasion, "soft power", and diplomacy which is the strength of the United States were back. At least in appearance.

In six months at the White House, Barack Obama already strongly impressed the world by his master's degree and its restraint in international politics as he demonstrated in his speech in Cairo in the direction of the Arab and Muslim world or travel in Europe. Is this enough Is the policy of openness and listening to the world of "candor", more efficient that the perpetual threat against "rogue countries" and military interventions in the George W.. Bush Certainly the result of eight years of Republican administration led to a dangerous stalemate and worsened in alarming proportion, instability in the Middle East and the world more generally.

But the vision of the world of Barack Obama is still widely to stage major intentions. Of the Iran to the Korea of the North and the Iraq, they face realities, in what political scientist François Heisbourg, called "the thickness of the world". The first of these realities is the Iran. Obsession with nuclear proliferation, justified of course, largely hidden to the eyes of Westerners mutation in Iranian society and the hardening of a fraction of the regime, ready for everything to remain in power. To manipulation, evident in the last presidential elections in this country, Barack Obama was great deference to not to give the sense of want to mingle with the situation and especially to reach have an interlocutor ready to seize her hand on nuclear proliferation issues. But the means of action of the United States are limited. A military solution is not feasible because it would threaten to lead to a flare-up. Diplomatically Iranian leaders, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and Ali Khamenei, are not reliable interlocutors.

Then the Iraq is no longer at the top of the agenda for Washington, as in 2003, and the withdrawal of American troops from the cities must be effective today. The counter-insurgency policy of the "surge", the American military capacity-building, led by General David Petraeus at the end of the Bush administration, has been successful to some success. But after six years of American occupation, the tensions between Shia and Sunni are always strong and threaten to undermine the unity of the country at any time.

Third, the Korea of the North continued its provocations by announcing a second nuclear test in May followed by missile launches. And Pyongyang still represents a threat to us allies in the region, the Japan and South Korea. Especially almost eight years after the outbreak of the war in Afghanistan, us and Allied troops still fail to deal with the Taliban insurgency. The instability across the border tribal areas widely won neighbouring Pakistan with all the risks that this entails for a country with nuclear weapons.

And the list of threats does not stop there: be it in Africa, Somalia in Darfur, or the Middle East instability reigns. Yet there is a considerable change with era Bush. Barack Obama has an advantage: that of having abandoned a dangerous ideology for the world, that of the export of democracy, by force if necessary. Allowing it to adjust its response and begin to reconcile America with the rest of the world. The power of persuasion may already have had effects, even minimal. Binyamin Netanyahu, Israel's Prime Minister, certainly would not yield on Peregrine's settlement policy in the Palestinian territories but had to recognize the need for the creation of two States. Furthermore, in leading a more "candid" policy, President Obama performs an important Act: to recognize the age of the relative power of the United States. Before the powerlessness of the United Nations and other international organizations solutions North Korea, Iran, or Iraq or in the Arab-Israeli conflict, through cooperation with other powers, and not only the allies traditional, but also by China or the Russia. Definitely the world is not flat but complicated and thick.