Obama Won but Bet on Biden
Ahmed Hany
November 24, 2008
When elected President Barak Obama won he said, ´change has come to America.´ The world expects changes as well. The American community has changed from a White Anglo-Saxon Protestant, WASP elite and leadership to a starting phase of mosaic community that better express the American cosmopolitan life. The victory of Obama/Biden team proved the vitality of the American dream to the American youth especially that the democratic campaign could register half a million new voters that 75% of them voted for Obama. On the other hand, some commentators see that Obama´s victory is a refusal of Neo Cons policies more than a choice for Democrats as many independents and some Republicans considered McCain an extension of Bush´s legacy.
The entire world is fed up with Neo Cons policies, and the victory of Obama improved the image of America and this gives a good asset for Obama/Biden to build on it in their foreign policy. In 1991, the then inexperienced Bush who is not a Neo Con was surrounded by ultraconservative Neo Cons, whom Bush the father had described lunatics. The inexperienced elected President Obama will have the well experienced Vice Biden. Most probably, the foreign policy will be devised by a group from Broking Institute led by Biden whose voice will be the most important for Obama. Other voices of Clinton and Carter´s foreign policy aids will be important too.
The global American strategy did not change from Bush´s the father era. President Clinton did not change it. It stresses on the American global leadership and the control world´s resources. The level of militarization of the foreign policy was much less during the eight years of Clinton´s Administration. Obama also talks about the American leadership of the world. In fact, the most powerful and richest country has duties towards international peace. The world does not object to that. It objects to unilateral leadership without giving roles to others, the double standard policies, patronizing others as enemies to serve militarization of external policies, not balancing interests and violating others´ rights. Bush´s legacy caused harm to the US that it cannot and will not lead alone. Therefore, the Americans and the world need a pragmatic leadership that could lead through a group of superpowers to balance interests, rights and responsibilities of these superpowers and other regional powers depending on diplomacy more than military means.
Barak Obama belongs to the left wing of the Democratic Party. Joe Biden belongs to the right wing and previously he was critical of the left wing. This makes the foreign policy lies in somewhat dark territory. The economic crisis is the main problem for Obama, yet solving it needs cooperation between all superpowers and some monetary heavyweight centers among regional powers. These superpowers and regional powers have interests. Therefore, the new administration should balance and guard its steps.
The EU called for more balanced and better cooperative relation with the US. Russia insists on its confrontational policy, that has been adopted since the Georgian War. President Medevedv called for better relation and cooperation with the US while declaring the deployment of the new Alexander ground-to-ground missiles near the Polish borders as one of the Russian reaction to the American plans to deploy radars and antimissile missiles near the Russian borders. The Iranian President congratulated Obama while one of his generals stressed on the Revolutionary Guard´s ability to destroy hostile navies in the Gulf and its ability to close the Gulf. A NATO general responded next day and said that Iran cannot do that in a message to the new American Administration not to take hasty steps to withdraw from Iraq. Israel violated truce in Gaza to test the reaction of the new American Administration.
The Iraqi government is hesitant to sign the Security Pact with the US. Obama said that he would withdraw his forces from Iraq and Nancy Pelosi the head of the Senate said that the US would go out of Iraq with dignity. Here comes the role of the elected Vice-President Biden to secure control over the oil in the Middle East before withdrawal. In other words, the US would force the Iraqis to accept the presence of some powerful American Bases that could threaten or strike Iran and could secure oil supply to the US and the West. Here again Biden may advise Obama to talk to the Iranian to have them in a collective security system in the Gulf. In this specific point, the new administration meets Russian views about security building in the Gulf. War-On-Terror may take one front in Afghanistan and Biden may devise policies that make it more popular in the world.
The main Arabic problem, which is Palestine, lies in a dark territory. The first thing Obama would think about is his electoral campaign in 2012. Most probably, Netanyahu will be the next Israeli Premier. The Zionist Lobby tries to gain maximum benefits during the first presidential term in the US.
Analyzing the Obama´s campaign motto, which is "Change" one discovers that seeds of change were implanted in Afghanistan and Iraq. The expansion of the empire and the excessive spending on two wars without victory made Americans rethink tactics but not strategy. Then if Arabs want a change in American policy, they should do for it. When the Palestinian front is not unified and Israel can deal with its security problems without endangering the American interests there will be no change.
The Zionist Lobby had been organized before Belford´s promise. The Arab League should mobilize the Arab Americans to have more active role in the American political life. Now it is easy to have media campaigns and newspapers. The Arabs have the all means. This does not need Arab League reform to do that. Besides, when the British Premier asked the Gulf States to support advanced countries in their plans to overcome the economic crisis, these states should have asked what for? The West knows their security problems in the Gulf. They should know that their security is part of the Arabs security system. If the new administration predicted serious steps from the Arabs to defend their interests many thing would change. When Egypt stressed that the Arab League should have a full partnership in the Mediterranean Union like the EU the European partners responded positively and the partners agreed about full membership for the Arab League, the Palestinian Authority and Israel. This clears that when the Arabs put red lines others would respect them and a compromise would be reached.
When Hamas made its coup and established its leadership in Gaza, it was the first step to downgrade the Palestinian problem to be second to the Iraq and Iran´s files. The international community recognizes the Palestinian Authority as the representative of Palestinian People. Hamas´ members of parliament came according to Oslo accords that established the Palestinian Authority. Hence, Hamas accepted Oslo accords the day it nominated members for parliamentary elections as its members were not independent but were nominated as Hamas members. The split gives Israel a reason for its claims that it has not a partner for peace. Hamas gave Iranian strategy a faction that could be used in its nuclear file. As long as Hamas makes problems for the Palestinian Authority the question will be how to impose solutions if it will be agreed. The new American Administration will spend time dealing with Cairo, Riyadh and Tehran to solve this question while Israel will play alone in the ground to build more illegal settlements in the West Bank. While solving this question the Iran´s file would be discussed while the three capitals would spend more on armaments and arms factories will lead the West out of recession. Is this the national role that Hamas wants to play?!
The Arabs should stop imaginations about Obama´s background. If the case is so then they should know that Biden has a Jewish background and Obama chose one of the closest friends of Israel to work as a main officer of the White House. However, strategies in superpowers are devised to serve its interests.
Finally, pragmatic leadership is much better than an ideological one. However, if Arabs provided the stuff that a pragmate thinks about change would come to them. If they stayed happy with conspiracy theory and Wait-And-See policy, they would miss many opportunities as usual.
The entire world is fed up with Neo Cons policies, and the victory of Obama improved the image of America and this gives a good asset for Obama/Biden to build on it in their foreign policy. In 1991, the then inexperienced Bush who is not a Neo Con was surrounded by ultraconservative Neo Cons, whom Bush the father had described lunatics. The inexperienced elected President Obama will have the well experienced Vice Biden. Most probably, the foreign policy will be devised by a group from Broking Institute led by Biden whose voice will be the most important for Obama. Other voices of Clinton and Carter´s foreign policy aids will be important too.
The global American strategy did not change from Bush´s the father era. President Clinton did not change it. It stresses on the American global leadership and the control world´s resources. The level of militarization of the foreign policy was much less during the eight years of Clinton´s Administration. Obama also talks about the American leadership of the world. In fact, the most powerful and richest country has duties towards international peace. The world does not object to that. It objects to unilateral leadership without giving roles to others, the double standard policies, patronizing others as enemies to serve militarization of external policies, not balancing interests and violating others´ rights. Bush´s legacy caused harm to the US that it cannot and will not lead alone. Therefore, the Americans and the world need a pragmatic leadership that could lead through a group of superpowers to balance interests, rights and responsibilities of these superpowers and other regional powers depending on diplomacy more than military means.
Barak Obama belongs to the left wing of the Democratic Party. Joe Biden belongs to the right wing and previously he was critical of the left wing. This makes the foreign policy lies in somewhat dark territory. The economic crisis is the main problem for Obama, yet solving it needs cooperation between all superpowers and some monetary heavyweight centers among regional powers. These superpowers and regional powers have interests. Therefore, the new administration should balance and guard its steps.
The EU called for more balanced and better cooperative relation with the US. Russia insists on its confrontational policy, that has been adopted since the Georgian War. President Medevedv called for better relation and cooperation with the US while declaring the deployment of the new Alexander ground-to-ground missiles near the Polish borders as one of the Russian reaction to the American plans to deploy radars and antimissile missiles near the Russian borders. The Iranian President congratulated Obama while one of his generals stressed on the Revolutionary Guard´s ability to destroy hostile navies in the Gulf and its ability to close the Gulf. A NATO general responded next day and said that Iran cannot do that in a message to the new American Administration not to take hasty steps to withdraw from Iraq. Israel violated truce in Gaza to test the reaction of the new American Administration.
The Iraqi government is hesitant to sign the Security Pact with the US. Obama said that he would withdraw his forces from Iraq and Nancy Pelosi the head of the Senate said that the US would go out of Iraq with dignity. Here comes the role of the elected Vice-President Biden to secure control over the oil in the Middle East before withdrawal. In other words, the US would force the Iraqis to accept the presence of some powerful American Bases that could threaten or strike Iran and could secure oil supply to the US and the West. Here again Biden may advise Obama to talk to the Iranian to have them in a collective security system in the Gulf. In this specific point, the new administration meets Russian views about security building in the Gulf. War-On-Terror may take one front in Afghanistan and Biden may devise policies that make it more popular in the world.
The main Arabic problem, which is Palestine, lies in a dark territory. The first thing Obama would think about is his electoral campaign in 2012. Most probably, Netanyahu will be the next Israeli Premier. The Zionist Lobby tries to gain maximum benefits during the first presidential term in the US.
Analyzing the Obama´s campaign motto, which is "Change" one discovers that seeds of change were implanted in Afghanistan and Iraq. The expansion of the empire and the excessive spending on two wars without victory made Americans rethink tactics but not strategy. Then if Arabs want a change in American policy, they should do for it. When the Palestinian front is not unified and Israel can deal with its security problems without endangering the American interests there will be no change.
The Zionist Lobby had been organized before Belford´s promise. The Arab League should mobilize the Arab Americans to have more active role in the American political life. Now it is easy to have media campaigns and newspapers. The Arabs have the all means. This does not need Arab League reform to do that. Besides, when the British Premier asked the Gulf States to support advanced countries in their plans to overcome the economic crisis, these states should have asked what for? The West knows their security problems in the Gulf. They should know that their security is part of the Arabs security system. If the new administration predicted serious steps from the Arabs to defend their interests many thing would change. When Egypt stressed that the Arab League should have a full partnership in the Mediterranean Union like the EU the European partners responded positively and the partners agreed about full membership for the Arab League, the Palestinian Authority and Israel. This clears that when the Arabs put red lines others would respect them and a compromise would be reached.
When Hamas made its coup and established its leadership in Gaza, it was the first step to downgrade the Palestinian problem to be second to the Iraq and Iran´s files. The international community recognizes the Palestinian Authority as the representative of Palestinian People. Hamas´ members of parliament came according to Oslo accords that established the Palestinian Authority. Hence, Hamas accepted Oslo accords the day it nominated members for parliamentary elections as its members were not independent but were nominated as Hamas members. The split gives Israel a reason for its claims that it has not a partner for peace. Hamas gave Iranian strategy a faction that could be used in its nuclear file. As long as Hamas makes problems for the Palestinian Authority the question will be how to impose solutions if it will be agreed. The new American Administration will spend time dealing with Cairo, Riyadh and Tehran to solve this question while Israel will play alone in the ground to build more illegal settlements in the West Bank. While solving this question the Iran´s file would be discussed while the three capitals would spend more on armaments and arms factories will lead the West out of recession. Is this the national role that Hamas wants to play?!
The Arabs should stop imaginations about Obama´s background. If the case is so then they should know that Biden has a Jewish background and Obama chose one of the closest friends of Israel to work as a main officer of the White House. However, strategies in superpowers are devised to serve its interests.
Finally, pragmatic leadership is much better than an ideological one. However, if Arabs provided the stuff that a pragmate thinks about change would come to them. If they stayed happy with conspiracy theory and Wait-And-See policy, they would miss many opportunities as usual.