The President's speech at the United Nations was a hopeful speech entitled Real Change is Possible but the President is bound to be accused of naïveté. Most striking is this departure from the reality of our world:

In an era when our destiny is shared, power is no longer a zero-sum game. No one nation can or should try to dominate another nation. No world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will succeed. No balance of power among nations will hold. The traditional divisions between nations of the South and the North make no sense in an interconnected world; nor do alignments of nations rooted in the cleavages of a long-gone Cold War.

What planet is he on? That's a noble aspiration, no doubt, but in a world that includes the Chinese not to mention the North Koreans, the Syrians, the Iranians, the Russians, Burmese Generals and dysfunctional African despots  among others that's frankly delusional and dangerous. I'm not even sure I trust the Americans given our penchant for garrisoning the world. It's a tad hypocritical to talk about the need to eschew global domination when the United States has military bases scattered across the planet. I appreciate the President's hopes for humanity to indeed turn the corner on past injustices but this goes far beyond a failed Wilsonian idealism.

Despite my cynicism (and I can only imagine the response from the neo-conservatives), I do appreciate what the President is trying to say. The world is now so interconnected that solving the problems that confront humanity requires global inputs and a cooperation heretofore never achieved. The hour is indeed late and the problems pressing thus it is incumbent to highlight that we are indeed in this together. As the President noted "we come from many places, but we share a common future."

The President broke wisely and decisively with Bush unilateralism and American exceptionalism. Instead, the President harkened back to Franklin Delano Roosevelt, one of the main movers behind the founding of the United Nations.

This body was founded on the belief that the nations of the world could solve their problems together. Franklin Roosevelt, who died before he could see his vision for this institution become a reality, put it this way -- and I quote: "The structure of world peace cannot be the work of one man, or one party, or one nation.... It cannot be a peace of large nations -- or of small nations. It must be a peace which rests on the cooperative effort of the whole world."

The cooperative effort of the whole world. Those words ring even more true today, when it is not simply peace, but our very health and prosperity that we hold in common. Yet we also know that this body is made up of sovereign states. And sadly, but not surprisingly, this body has often become a forum for sowing discord instead of forging common ground; a venue for playing politics and exploiting grievances rather than solving problems. After all, it is easy to walk up to this podium and point figures -- point fingers and stoke divisions. Nothing is easier than blaming others for our troubles, and absolving ourselves of responsibility for our choices and our actions. Anybody can do that. Responsibility and leadership in the 21st century demand more.

Good luck convincing our own corporations of this. We live in a world that is rapidly evolving where corporations do what is their interest and not in the interest of the nation much less that of the planet. The United Nations may be composed of sovereign states but economic power is now firmly in the hands of an evermore concentrated few. Wealth is now more concentrated than at any time in the two million year history of humanity. Economic elites and the corporations they control are now firmly transnational and these have the capability of subverting governments at their will. Simply put, too many politicians are now in the pockets of the Rupert Murdochs et al.

Nor is this just a Western development. Take the case now unraveling in Windhoek, the capital of the sparsely populated but mineral-rich Namibia. There anticorruption investigators allege that a Chinese company, Nuctech, defrauded the Namibian government over the supply of X-ray scanners, a deal backed by a $100 million Chinese loan. Who runs Nuctech? Hu Haifeng does and he just happens to be the son of China's President Hu Jintao. Nor is Nuctech the only Chinese company accused of graft in Namibia. A Chinese engineering company contracted to build a rail line is also being probed over alleged transfers to the same trading company. This is par for the course in China's involvement in Africa and Asia. The President is looking through some rather rose-coloured glasses if he thinks corporate behavior, ours or otherwise, is bound to change by their own accord.

In 2007, the United Nations initiated its Global Compact nominally to curb harmful policies and behaviors by transnational corporations that lead to corruption and violations of human, labor and environmental rights. The Compact urges corporations to take a precautionary approach to environmental challenges, to avoid complicity in human rights abuses, to recognize workers' right to collective bargaining, and to eliminate forced and child labor, among other tenets.

Corporate watchdog organizations have criticized the UN Compact because it lacks teeth: "It's not enforceable; it has no enforcement mechanism," notes Patti Lynn, Director of Corporate Accountability International. The United Nations' own description of the Global Compact on its Web site, says the Compact "is not a regulatory instrument - it does not police, enforce, or monitor companies' behavior. Instead, the Compact relies on companies' public accountability, transparency, `enlightened self-interest,' and on civil society to assure compliance with Compact principles." The Compact, Lynn says, "allows transnational companies to increase their credibility by wrapping themselves in the UN flag." It does a great disservice to pretend that the President's speech addresses the reality of how the world is run.

Still the President mimicked Roosevelt as he outlined the "Four Pillars" - FDR spoke of "Four Freedoms" - that he believes are "fundamental to the future that we want for our children": "non-proliferation and disarmament; the promotion of peace and security; the preservation of our planet; and a global economy that advances opportunity for all people."

Pillar 1. Nuclear Nonproliferation
"We must stop the spread of nuclear weapons and seek... a world without them," said President Obama as he committed to new negotiations to halt the spread of weapons of mass destruction. He promised that the United States would live up to its responsibility to lead in the endeavor.

Pillar 2. Pursuit of Peace
Declaring the United States to be "committed to diplomacy,""partnerships to target terrorists, peacekeeping and development aid," the President said, "I will not waver in my pursuit of peace." He drew applause with an aggressive embrace of Middle East peacemaking, in which he announced: "America does not accept the legitimacy (of Israeli settlements)." President Obama added: "The time has come to re-launch negotiations -- without preconditions -- that address the permanent-status issues: security for Israelis and Palestinians; borders, refugees and Jerusalem... The goal is clear: two states living side by side in peace and security -- a Jewish state of Israel, with true security for all Israelis; and a viable, independent Palestinian state with contiguous territory that ends the occupation that began in 1967, and realizes the potential of the Palestinian people."

Pillar 3. Protecting the Environment is Essential to Peace and Prosperity.
"We must recognize that in the 21st century, there will be no peace unless we take responsibility for (climate change on) our planet," said the president. He added that, "The days when America dragged its feet on this issue are over."

Pillar 4. A Global Economy That Advances Opportunity for All People.
Speaking of setting "new rules of the road" that address greed and speculation, Obama promised to promote "a course for growth that is balanced and sustainable." But his primary focus was on working with other countries to address hunger, disease and poverty. "We will set out sights of the eradication of extreme poverty in our time," he said, emphasizing the responsibilities of wealthy nations to do more to aid and respect developing nations.

"The magnitude of our challenges has yet to be met by the measure of our action," noted the President which is certainly an understatement. Still one cannot be but impressed by the President's infectious optimism and the power of his own story.

As an African American, I will never forget that I would not be here today without the steady pursuit of a more perfect union in my country. And that guides my belief that no matter how dark the day may seem, transformative change can be forged by those who choose to side with justice. And I pledge that America will always stand with those who stand up for their dignity and their rights -- for the student who seeks to learn; the voter who demands to be heard; the innocent who longs to be free; the oppressed who yearns to be equal.

I'll close by citing John Nichols who wrote over at The Nation:

Obama acknowledged that his words were just that -- words. And he spoke bluntly about the need for leaders to return to their countries and "do the hard work" of making real the promises presented at the podiums of the United Nations.

Obama, whose rhetoric has too frequently extended beyond his reach, has plenty of work to do in Washington.

He admitted that "America has too often been selective in our promotion of democracy," and his administration has yet to make a full enough break with the lawless and anti-democratic approaches of the Bush-Cheney years.

Indeed, if Obama would simply live up to the lofty language of his address, it would represent a break not just with Bush but with compromises on issues ranging from extraordinary rendition and the use of military force that have continued since January 20. That's a message that domestic activists should highlight, particularly in debates about torture and respect for international law.

President Obama needs to be change he wants us all to be. Until then, colour me a cynic.