Back to Gideon RachmanThe worst suspicions of liberal supporters of Obama are liable to be confirmed by the delighted reception some eminent neo-cons have given to the new Obama foreign policy team.
Here is a comment from Max Boot of the Council on Foreign Relations:
“As someone who was skeptical of Obama’s moderate posturing during the campaign, I have to admit that I am gobsmacked by these appointments , most of which could just as easily have come from a President McCain. (Jim Jones is an old friend of McCain’s, and McCain almost certainly would have asked Gates to stay on as well.) This all but puts an end to the 16-month timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, the unconditional summits with dictators, and other foolishness that once emanated from the Obama campaign. His appointments suggest that, if anything, his administration will have a Reapolitiker, rather than a liberal, bent, although Clinton and Steinberg at State should be powerful voices for “neo-liberalism” which is not so different in many respects from “neo-conservativism”. Both, for instance, support humanitarian interventions in places like Darfur and Bosnia.”
So what are we to make of this? Well, it’s true that both Clinton and Jones are centrist appointments. And its striking that while the Obama campaign talked a lot about the need to “demilitarise” American foreign policy, he has chosen a marine general as his national security adviser.
Boot is also onto something when he asserts that the dividing line between “neoconservatism” and “liberal internationalism” is not as distinct as some liberals would like to think. Both have traditionally been well-disposed towards the idea of US military intervention overseas. The liberals tend to be keener on multilateral interventions and UN support. But even that is not a hard and fast rule - there was no UN mandate for the Kosovo war. The liberal internationalists are also more likely to cite human-rights or a humanitarian tragedy as the reason for intervention. But - again - the line blurs quite quickly. The liberals are keen on the idea of national interest; and the neo-cons love to talk about human-rights. That was why it was possible to bring together a neocon-liberal alliance, in favour of the Iraq war.
But let’s not get too carried way. I still think that an Obama administration will bring some significant changes in foreign policy. Most important, the Obama people are much less likely to start a war with Iran than McCain would have been. But I think they will also put more effort into the Middle East peace process, they will stick to the plan to withdraw from Iraq and they will be less confrontational with Russia. They will also be keener to work through the UN and they will put more effort into climate change
Most important, the US will have an articulate, intelligent president who has lived overseas and who intriuges the world.
This blog covers a variety of topics from US foreign policy to European politics and the Middle East - and whatever else happens to be in the news or catch my attention. I joined the FT as chief foreign affairs commentator in 2006, after a 15-year career at The Economist which included stints as a correspondent in Brussels, Bangkok and Washington. I write a weekly column on foreign affairs, which appears in the paper on Tuesdays. Occasionally my FT colleagues contribute posts to this blog.
Geoff Dyer is the FT's China bureau chief. He has been a correspondent in Shanghai and in Brazil and has also covered the pharmaceuticals and biotechnology industries from London.
Roula Khalaf is the FT's Middle East editor. She has worked for the FT since 1995, first as North Africa correspondent, then Middle East correspondent and most recently as Middle East editor. Before joining the FT, she was a staff writer for Forbes magazine in New York. 
James Blitz is the FT's defence and diplomatic editor. He has been the FT's political editor, based in London, and Rome bureau chief. James is a former Moscow bureau chief for the Sunday Times.
Alan Beattie is the FT's world trade editor. He has previously been economics leader writer and spent two years in Washington DC as chief US economics correspondent. Before joining the FT, Alan was an economist at the Bank of England. 
Victor Mallet is the FT's Madrid correspondent. He is a former Asia editor of the FT, and, in more than 20 years at the organisation, has also worked in Africa, Europe and the Middle East. In 1990 he escaped from Kuwait after being one of the few foreign correspondents there when Iraq invaded. 
Stefan Wagstyl is the FT's eastern Europe editor, co-ordinating coverage of the region. He has also been the FT's bureau chief in Tokyo and New Delhi.