With last year's North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit in Bucharest, Romania, being a showstopper, I'm proud to say I tuned into this year's summit in Strasbourg, France, with a sense of eager anticipation. Just think, finally France is re-integrating itself into the military command of NATO and will be able to have a full voice in shaping the direction of the organization. Moreover, President Barack Obama's first visit with our transatlantic allies resulted in smart and pragmatic diplomacy that ensured a continuation of European support for the mission in Afghanistan even if many commentators are describing the commitment of 3,000 troops (the majority being non-combat individuals) as too low of a number.

However, it was with a sense of dread and dismay I sat watching Obama on stage in front of a town hall meeting in Strasbourg. These types of forums are dubious at best in the American political arena-due not in the least to the self-selecting nature of question askers-but in Europe the idea seems even sillier. While the premise was obvious-Obama wanted to appeal to the people of Europe and personally describe to European youth what changes would be coming in American foreign policy-the execution and underlying assumptions of this public appearance appeared flawed. The transatlantic alliance is without a doubt our most important global relationship, as the United States and (for purposes of simplicity) the European Union are the two most advanced, mature and diverse economies on earth. But the closeness is based on more than just trade; it's an important political and diplomatic relationship that facilitates cooperation not only on the Balkans, Middle East and ocean/sea lanes policy, but also in influencing the direction of international organizations. Since 2003, when the Iraq War caused a major rift in U.S.-European relations, a new type of managed relationship between the two camps has emerged. This change has been most visible since 2007 when George W. Bush's administration was being overshadowed as the 2008 presidential campaign heated up, and Western Europe saw new leaders who were either voted into office or who solidified their power in Germany, France and the United Kingdom. This leadership turnover has been important for transatlantic relations. Instead of taking cooperation and partnership for granted, both sides now devote more time, money, effort and diplomats to make sure the relationship is not just resilient but robust.

It's within this context that Obama's first presidential visit to Europe was supposed not only to capitalize on the relationship that has been gradually repaired over the past couple of years, but also to make good on campaign promises to restore America's standing in the world. With such a weight on Obama's shoulders, the use of a European town hall meeting seemed to fall flat. One woman's question was almost not answered because she prefaced her query with a comment about how she held dual citizenship in the EU and the United States-apparently those individuals who personify the transatlantic bond raise the ire of a leader who wanted to speak directly to the European people. Subsequent questions included, "Do you regret running for president?" and "Have you picked out a dog yet?"

Maybe when taken as just one part of the whole, the events of this 20-minute town hall meeting are inconsequential, but it struck me as a case of a new president relying on the wrong type of dialogue. If ensuring a credible NATO and EU in which European member states are treated as equal allies is the Obama goal, then a speaking tour of Europe seems to undercut what should be the most important element of his European visit: trusting and relying on European leaders to promote the transatlantic relationship within their own states. Would more states have come on board with Bush's foreign policies if he had, at the beginning of his presidential term, hosted a similar European event where serious questions would be padded with lighthearted fluff about dogs and personal regrets? Doubtful-mainly because those divisions were the result of government-to-government divergences more so than a lack of American government-to-European public interaction, which is why it is not just a new U.S. administration that has helped to bring a return to warm U.S.-European relations. A new European leadership has spent more time supporting the managed relationship as well.

We've already seen a higher level of attention paid to the more subtle components of Obama's foreign policy, such as the criticisms of his state gift to UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown (Region 1-encoded DVDs) and to the Queen (part of which was an iPod- she already had one) and superficial events such as the quick Strasbourg town hall meeting don't seem to help-although it may not, in the end, hurt. We might be better served by either spending more time on the government-to-government level of contact or actually committing to real, open forums. The current state of the transatlantic relationship presents partners on both sides of the pond with a new chance to bring cooperation on global affairs to an unprecedented level. We cannot afford to spoil this opportunity by spinning the wheels of foreign policy instead of gaining traction with our European partners.