by Matthew Rusling

    WASHINGTON, Dec. 22 (Xinhua) -- While many experts give U.S. President Barack Obama high marks on foreign policy during his first year in office, his critics harbor a number of misgivings.

    Topping the list is what critics say is the president's assumption that his personality, rather than geopolitical realities, can drive foreign policy. Other analysts charge him with procrastinating on serious foreign policy decisions.

    Some experts take the middle ground, saying a U.S. president's first year in office is typically a feeling out period and major decisions will come next year.

    Obama took the helm of government on a wave of supporters' hopes that he would represent a United States that was willing to listen, different from what opponents of predecessor George W. Bush billed as an isolationist America.

    But critics say showing a friendlier U.S. face has done little to help the new leader tackle the rash of sticky foreign policy challenges, such as the unfinished war in Afghanistan.

    "Obama wants to uplift the United States' image abroad but at the same time is coming to grips with the reality that being liked in Europe does not always mean the United States will benefit," said Matthew Gertken, geopolitical analyst at global intelligence company Stratfor.

    Obama's engagement with Europe had been unsuccessful in persuading EU nations to lend any major support for the war in Afghanistan, his top foreign policy priority. Nor had it led to any other diplomatic gains, he said.

    Still, in the first year of any presidency, decisive actions that affect the globe were not to be taken, Gertken said.

    The second year, however, was the one that often shaped a presidency, he said, pointing to the Bush administration's decision to invade Iraq, which took place during his second year in office and defined his presidency.

    Michael O'Hanlon, a fellow at the Brookings Institution, said the president's first year in office-demonstrated solid thinking on foreign policy.

    Strategies such as withdrawing from Iraq and deploying additional troops in Afghanistan while setting a deadline for U.S. withdrawal were well thought out, he added.

    On Iran, Obama was no longer under the delusion that his personality would suffice as a strategy and he had become more pragmatic on the issue, he said.

    On the Middle East peace process, although there had been no real progress, the president had acted diplomatically in avoiding cozying up to Israel while reassuring Israeli leaders that the United States would not abandon them, he said.

    Observers say that, as 2010 approaches, an Obama doctrine may be taking shape. The administration has begun to position the United States as a core member of a wider global system harkening back to the years between the end of the Cold War and 9/11.

    Others, however, say the president's strategy is simply to delay major decisions until some undetermined future date.

    "If I had to sum up his foreign policy, it's kick the can down the road," said James Carafano, a fellow at the Heritage Foundation.

    Despite the friendlier tone, Obama's foreign policy stance had not drastically changed from the previous administration, he said.

    Obama had still not closed the U.S. detainment facility in Guantanamo, Cuba - used to house terror suspects since the Bush administration - despite earlier promises to do so, he noted.

    While the president vowed to shutter the prison by January, some news reports indicated that the Obama administration was leaving open the possibility of holding some detainees indefinitely (perhaps in a U.S. prison), which was strikingly similar to his predecessor's policies.

    "There tends to be more continuity in U.S. foreign policy than all the hoopla (over a new administration) would make it seem," Carafano said.

    Scott Payne, senior policy adviser at thinktank Third Way, said Obama laid a foundation for the rest of his presidency by establishing an early policy of working with institutions such as the United Nations to achieve foreign policy objectives.

    While Bush took a "with-us-or-against-us" approach, Obama's approach was one of international consensus. On relations with Iran, for example, Obama had coordinated with allies, he said.

    Indeed, Obama this month won a Nobel Peace Prize partly based on his insistence on multi-lateral diplomacy. But some noted that, unlike Nobel awards in science and economics, which were decided by academic organizations, the peace prize was decided by Norwegian politicians.

    The president will face a number of foreign policy challenges in 2010, experts say.

    Gertken said Iran, which faced sanctions if it did no meet the Dec. 31 deadline to engage in talks over its nuclear program, would move to the forefront of Obama's foreign policy agenda next year.

    Iran says the program is for peaceful purposes, while the United States suspects Iran has ambitions to build weapons.

    In addition, Afghanistan could put Obama in the hot seat as fighting intensifies and U.S. casualties mount once the 30,000 additional troops arrive in the war-torn country.