Barack Obama has come to Europe to tell the Europeans that they still count, despite the greater emphasis that the United States is placing on the Pacific and particularly on relations with China and India. Aside from the Irish roots interlude, abbreviated by an Icelandic volcano, the emphasis of Obama's visit is on Britain and France, the United States' main military partners in Europe.
Poland requires reassurance as well, after Obama canceled the deployment of an anti-missile system in a bid to "reset" relations with Moscow.
The trip may be politically motivated. When Obama received a rock star reception in 2008, it did not hurt and helped parry the argument that he was a foreign policy liability. Recapturing some of those moments may prove useful in 2012.
It also may be part of a reassessment- the United States, whatever the disparity between the American investment in military resources and the European investment, will continue to need Europe even if only in a cameo role. It is easier to sell the American public a coalition rather than a go it alone policy. The European contribution may be small, but nobody else is going to supply troops.
The United States also needs Europe for geographic access. Aircraft carriers are fine, but bases in southern Italy are better when it comes to projecting American power in Libya.
Symbolically, the first major stop is London. It is obvious that Obama and his British hosts are making every effort to reestablish the frayed special relationship. It starts with the royal family warmly embracing the president and first lady, from a banquet to a meeting with Britain's power couple Will and Kate and culminating in Obama's address to parliament.
There is also an attempt by Obama to atone for what was seen as a disrespectful attitude to former Prime Minister Gordon Brown. During Brown's residence in 10 Downing St., Obama removed the bust of Churchill from his office and welcomed Gordon Brown with a present of a set of DVDs that was not compatible for use with British television.
There is a measure of irony in the fact that during the first two Obama years in office, the economic policy of Obama and Brown were closely aligned. As opposed to the German approach, they both believed in deficit stimulus spending until economic recovery sets in.
The coolness towards Gordon Brown contrasted with Tony Blair's capability to be on intimate terms with Bill Clinton --no surprise, as both were practitioners of 3rd Way politics. Blair was able to maintain that relationship with George Bush, a conservative. Brown, who has ties to the Democratic Party and Harvard intellectuals, would have expected warm treatment from Obama. He didn't get it. There was an age difference between the two leaders, and perhaps there was also one of temperament.
Barack Obama is ill at ease with a blue-collar audience. He is much more comfortable with an upscale intellectual crowd. Gordon Brown is no intellectual lightweight and holds a doctorate, but represents a moralistic Scottish culture. He and his wife Sarah simply were not fun to be with.
Along comes David Cameron, who campaigned on a policy of cutting government expenditures before Obama belatedly came around to deficit reduction. He only did so after the Republicans made it a winning issue amongst the public. On the other hand, Barack and Michelle may find David and fashion-conscious Samantha (Sam Cam) Cameron more convivial company.