The World

I appear to have endorsed Barack Obama by accident. Brad DeLong – well-known blogger and economist – has a note on his weblog headlined – “Gideon Rachman of the Financial Times endorses Barack Obama”. And WCM asked yesterday – “Gideon’s endorsement of Obama for (global) Commander-in-Chief. Premature? Politically motivated? Deserved? ”

Oddly, despite the headline on my column – “Obama for commander-in-chief” – I wasn’t consciously sitting down to write an endorsement column. What I was aiming to do was to respond to the polls that show that McCain is much more trusted as future commander-in-chief. But c-in-c is not the only role performed by the president.

There are a few subjects on which I prefer McCain. Trade is the most obvious. I also think he has taken sound positions on immigration and on campaign-finance reform. And I accept that McCain was courageous to take an unpopular position on the surge – and that he has been largely vindicated. (Although he was wrong to back the war in the first place.)

But I think that Iran is shaping up as the biggest foreign-policy dilemma facing the next president. And there – as far as I’m concerned – Obama is clearly the better choice. In fact, the McCain position is downright dangerous.

Does that amount to an endorsement of Obama? Just about, I suppose. Although, come November, it’s possible that some other issue will have displaced Iran as the number one concern – or that Obama will have revealed himself as a raving lunatic. For now, however, yes – I’m backing Obama.

Two further notes on this: First, I should admit to a conflict of interest. I put £10 on Obama to win the presidency at 5-1, back in December – ie before the Iowa caucus. So my prescience has given me a small financial stake in his victory. I believe, however, that I can overcome this and maintain my habitual objectivity.

Second this is not an invitation to re-open the “bomb Iran” discussion.