It's the handshake that the White House wishes would go away. President Obama brandished a smile when he shook hands with Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez recently at the Summit of the Americas. Chávez is one of the fiercest critics of the United States. And the unplanned greeting has sparked days of debate stateside.
The Obama-Chávez handshake evokes more significant memories of past Western heads of state greeting adversaries. As Democrats point out, Ronald Reagan warmly shook hands with Russian leader Mikhail Gorbachev.
In Depth: 8 Handshakes That Changed History
The Reagan-Gorbachev meetings led to the first treaty to reduce the number of nuclear weapons and the end of the Cold War. At the infamous extreme, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain shook hands with German Führer Adolf Hitler in order to avoid war. Chamberlain notoriously thought he'd achieved "peace for our time."
The Obama-Chávez exchange is not of the same diplomatic caliber. The handshake was more similar to an unexpected encounter between President Bill Clinton and Fidel Castro in 2000.
Castro and Clinton shook hands at the U.N.'s Millennium Summit in New York. Clinton's staff knew the greeting made for poor symbolism. The White House initially denied the handshake took place. No pictures of the greeting were captured. Later on, Clinton's aides were forced to acknowledge that the two leaders had indeed shaken hands.
In other words, handshakes matter.
Greetings between adversaries are not entered into lightly. They often call for nuanced theatrics. It was not a forgone conclusion that Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat would shake hands when they signed an accord signifying hope for an Arab-Israeli peace. Before the ceremony, Clinton told Rabin he'd have to shake Arafat's hand. Rabin was reluctant, though conceded.
Handshakes between foes on the world stage, however lopsided the relationship, traditionally signify détente, an historic peace accord or treaty. The debate over the Obama-Chávez handshake has continued, in part, because Obama earned no substance for the symbolism.
Obama has also come under some domestic heat for hesitating to defend the more positive side of U.S. policy when faced with critiques. The Chávez greeting garnered exaggerated press coverage because it captured an emerging critical narative of the new president.
At the recent summit, Chávez handed the president a controversial book on the warts of U.S. policy. Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega spent the large part of an hour offering effectively the oral version. Ortega rebuked the United States as an “empire” defined by “expansionist policies, war policies.” The Argentine president also went on the offensive. Obama did not respond, even in the prudent tongue of diplomacy. That silence led to loud debates stateside.
To be sure, Chávez is no Soviet premier. Venezuela has never constituted a serious threat to the United States. As the president saw fit to point out, Venezuela has 1/600th the military budget of the United States.
Venezuela is also, however, no bit player on the world stage. It has the world's seventh largest oil reserve. Chávez has become a global icon for anti-American sentiment.
Chávez himself realized the diplomatic symbolism of the new American president warmly greeting the longtime critic of America. He wasted no time seizing upon the potential propaganda. The Venezuelan leader quickly posted an image of the handshake on his government's website.