Is the stimulus Obama’s Iraq? (Financial Times, UK)

As the $819bn stimulus bill passed the House on Wednesday, Mike Pence, the Republican congressman from Indiana, explained why it was doing so without the benefit of a single Republican vote. Mr Pence called the stimulus a “dusty old wish-list of liberal spending priorities”. It is meeting little Republican enthusiasm as it approaches the Senate for a vote next Monday.

Well, tough cookies, one is tempted to say. Liberals are now in power, led by a popular president. It is in the nature of things that the nation’s agenda will be their agenda. But an emergency stimulus is a special case. Mr Pence’s warning should not go unheeded. The problem he mentions is serious, with the potential to divide the country even if the stimulus works.

There are two strands of US liberal activism: on the one hand, there is spending on big public works projects, of the sort that was popular between the New Deal dam-building of the 1930s, through which Franklin D. Roosevelt electrified the south and west, and the space programme of John F. Kennedy, which put men on the moon from 1969. On the other hand, there is welfare, which began with FDR but spread profligately after Lyndon Johnson. Americans never repudiated the public works legacy of the New Deal, even at the high tide of Reaganism. This is what they generally think of when they use the word “stimulus”. But they remain suspicious of post-1960s welfare programmes and this stimulus is in large part a welfare bill.

Stimulus, many economists have stressed of late, is about restoring what John Maynard Keynes called animal spirits. Keynes meant something like “morale”. But there is a more animal sense to “animal spirits” that appeals to the broad public.

FULL ARTICLE

Iran Cleric: "Don’t repeat Bush’s warnings" (Khaleej Times, UAE)

TEHRAN - An influential Iranian cleric criticized the new U.S. administration on Friday for signaling that it reserved all its options, ranging from diplomacy to military action, to pressure Iran over its nuclear program.

But Ali Akbar Rafsanjani, a former president, also held out the prospect that if U.S. President Barack Obama changed Washington’s approach towards Iran’s disputed nuclear plans the Islamic Republic would cooperate with it in the Middle East.

Obama’s administration has said he would break from his predecessor by pursuing direct talks with Tehran but has also warned Iran to expect more pressure if it did not meet the U.N. Security Council demand to halt nuclear uranium enrichment.

Iran has repeatedly refused to halt atomic activities which the West suspects are aimed at making bombs but which Tehran says are to generate electricity so that it can export more oil.

“We have this expectation that you (the United States) take a fair and wise step so that Iran’s (nuclear) rights would not be violated,” Rafsanjani told worshipers at Friday prayers.

If that happens, the United States “would be able to help the people of this region with the companionship and cooperation of Iran so that we solve the region’s problems”, he said in the sermon at Tehran University broadcast live on state radio.

FULL ARTICLE

Indonesia Muslims Stage Obama Protest (Khaleej Times, UAE)

JAKARTA - About a hundred Indonesians from a hardline Muslim group rallied outside the U.S. embassy in Jakarta on Friday, some criticising U.S. President Barack Obama over suspected U.S. missile strikes in Pakistan.

‘Obama has promised maintaining a mutual respect with the Muslim world but the position that the U.S. shows when it attacks Pakistan and Afghanistan means it has not changed,’ said Heru Binawan, head of the Jakarta branch of Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia.

While there is a radical fringe, most Indonesian Muslims follow a moderate form of Islam. There is also a lot of pride in Indonesia over the four years Obama spent in Jakarta as child. The suspected U.S. missiles were fired into Pakistan last week, killing at least 14 people. It was the first strike since Obama took office.

Some of the protesters from the Muslim group Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia also held banners saying ‘Obama is similar to Bush’. Indonesia has been a key ally in the U.S.-led ‘war on terror’ and looks to America for trade and investment. But many of President George W. Bush's policies, especially in the Middle East, have been unpopular in the predominantly Muslim nation.

LINK BACK

OP-ED: Free Trade Threat (The AUSTRALIAN)

The demon of protectionism is stirring in the US Congress.

President Barack Obama has moved quickly to assemble the kind of economic stimulus package that the International Monetary Fund says is essential to halt the downward economic spiral and prepare the ground for recovery. Workers, losing jobs in their thousands, were looking to Washington for "action, bold and swift", Mr Obama said as the US Congress prepared to vote on his package. The House of Representatives endorsed the $US825 billion plan ($1.25 trillion), while the Senate is still considering a parallel bill.

There is much to commend in the approach taken by the new administration. It picks up the IMF's recommendation that the most direct way to boost demand is for government to spend money itself on one-off initiatives. Almost $US300 billion is directed to state governments that do not have the ability to borrow independently, and are facing sharp cuts to services and infrastructure spending as their own tax revenue dries up. A further $US275 billion is devoted to tax cuts aimed at low-income families.

The package also bears the marks of the worst features of American democracy, with congressmen trading their votes for inclusion of their pet projects. Hence, funds are provided for internet access to rural areas, an anti-smoking campaign, a super computer to study ocean currents, and the laying new turf on the mall from Capitol Building to the Lincoln Memorial.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: Obama's Dealing With Pyongyang (KOREA Times)

America's new foreign policy team, headed by Hillary Clinton, has started reviewing North Korea policy. Specifically, it wants to mull what else to do about the country's nuclear weapons.

As it does so, it may be useful to warn against the delusion that the country will be significantly changed by a shift in America's ― or any other country's ― policies.

This conclusion is simply stated, but hard to grasp, for it is natural in a democracy to think that your opponents, be they conservatives or liberals, are at the extreme of political stupidity, and that turning around their policies will change everything.

It is even more difficult when viewed from the United States, where the country's dominance of world affairs is easily exaggerated. Most of what happens in the world is not a result of U.S. policy.

This ``Unwashingtonian" thought leads to the next one which is that, as disappointing as it is, there is no ``big idea" that will transform North Korea from without.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: Stand up to Russia (Telegraph, UK)

President Obama doesn't need to make concessions to Putin.

Russia's first olive branch towards President Barack Obama has been offered with almost indecent haste. Only last year, the Kremlin declared that short-range missiles would be dispatched to Kaliningrad, its Baltic enclave, in retaliation for America's plan to site a defensive shield in Poland and the Czech Republic. This threat evaporated yesterday, swiftly replaced by Russian diplomats talking of "restarting" their relations with America and even Vladimir Putin, the flint-eyed prime minister, declaring himself "optimistic" about turning a new page.

Russia undoubtedly hopes to steer Mr Obama towards reviewing America's stance on missile defence. The outlines of a possible rapprochement between the two countries are emerging: America will defer the deployment of its anti-missile system, perhaps indefinitely, in return for Russian cooperation in the Security Council, notably by imposing more economic sanctions on Iran.

In truth, however, Russia has little choice but to seek an accommodation with the superpower.

FULL ARTICLE

A New America, A New UN? (Globe & Mail, CANADA)

Will Barack Obama put the UN back on the rails?

At her confirmation hearing before the U.S. Congress earlier this month, Susan Rice, the newly appointed American ambassador to the United Nations, described it as "an indispensable, if imperfect, institution for advancing our security and well-being in the 21st century." That kind of language has not been heard coming out of Washington for quite some time.

George W. Bush was not a great fan of the UN, to put it mildly. His administration believed that nothing could be allowed to stand in the way of America's sovereign right to defend its interests as it saw fit. At best, the UN was seen as a convenient tool for the delivery of humanitarian assistance and the management of conflict of secondary importance. The Iraq episode reinforced the neo-cons' conviction that the UN was a hostile entity not to be trusted under any circumstances.

The organization is emerging battered and bruised from the Bush era.

FULL ARTICLE

An Unnecessary War (PALESTINE Chronicle)

According the United Nations, the war on Gaza has already killed over 1,300 Palestinians and 13 Israelis, half of them women and children. It has wounded and maimed more than 5,300 inhabitants, and targeted without distinction Hamas militants, UN schools, mosques, ambulances, hospitals and refugee camps in Gaza. As we watch the unbearable images of what amounts to the liquidation of an entire civilian population, an analysis of the Israeli government’s motives and objectives of the war is required.

It has been argued repeatedly that Israel’s objectives are to shut down Hamas, which would benefit the Palestinian Authority, and, in particular, Mahmoud Abbas (the moderate); to strengthen the image of Kadima-Labor coalition in time for the upcoming elections in February 2009; or, to reestablish the power of an Israeli army seriously crippled by Hezbollah in 2006.

The only certainty at this stage is in the timing of the operation, which was undertaken at a time which takes advantage of the holiday season slowdown (like the July 2006 war in Lebanon) and the political transition in the White House.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: Obama and the Muslim Cold War (Jerusalem Post, ISRAEL)

The Middle East is gripped by a Muslim cold war, fiercer than anything since the 1950s. This deep political divide could stymie US President Barack Obama's well-intentioned efforts toward creation of a Palestinian state, engagement of the Iranian and Syrian regimes and quick withdrawal from Iraq.

Relations among the Muslim states of the Middle East have never been worse, not since the days when Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser sent his agents to assassinate political figures in Jordan and conduct a war in Yemen against the Saudi-backed royalists.

A razor-sharp cold war separates the moderate Arab Sunni states, including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and most of the Gulf states, from an Iranian-led axis that includes Syria, Hizbullah, Hamas and, less importantly, Qatar.

The issues over which these two camps struggle are as clear as the divide between them. Meeting the Iranian threat is the most important of them. For the Gulf states, Iran's success might threaten their survival. For Egypt, Iranian ascendancy would end its perennial claim to regional preeminence.

FULL ARTICLE

Obama, Iran, and Afghanistan (Asia Times, HONG KONG)

United States President Barack Obama has wasted little time making good on his promise of a fresh approach toward Iran based on "direct diplomacy". In only his first week in office, Obama has sent important signals about his determination to pursue "smart power" diplomacy with a country that has mystified five of his presidential predecessors.

Obama's envoy to the United Nations, Susan Rice, on Tuesday reiterated the president's Iran approach by using her first press interview to promise "vigorous and direct diplomacy" toward Iran. Rice later qualified the pledge by saying that unless Iran accepted the UN Security Council's demands to halt its uranium-enrichment program, international pressures on Tehran will intensify.

FULL ARTICLE

Obama Takes on China-US Ties (Al Jazeera, QATAR)

Al Jazeera Beijing correspondent Melissa Chan looks at what changes - or otherwise - Barack Obama will bring to US-China relations.

A week into the White House it is abundantly clear that President Obama's top priority will be saving the US economy. Along with two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and countless intelligence reports of terrorist threats around the globe, the presidential in-tray is brimming with issues demanding attention.

It's an overwhelming list - one in which China, of all relationships, would seem to be the last of American priorities. So what will the new Obama administration mean for US-China relations? The short and not very exciting answer is: probably not much different from the Bush administration. Or, indeed, if circumstances had been different and US voters had opted instead for a McCain administration.

Interdependence
U.S. candidates say a lot of things on the campaign trail, and Obama has had his share of tough words for China. But like others before him, the reality of the situation forces a distinct change of tune once they actually find themselves inside the Oval Office.

The United States and China are two interdependent powers, and there is no choice for either of these countries but to have a productive working relationship. As such the economy - and the pressing need for both countries to work together to improve the situation – will remain the overriding issue in the relationship.

FULL ARTICLE

Obama's Kashmir Conundrum (Guardian, UK)

Richard Holbrooke, newly appointed US peace envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, gained a reputation for robustness when negotiating an end to the Bosnian war. But after getting off to a remarkably bad start in his new job, he will need all his fabled toughness – plus large measures of unaccustomed finesse and tact – if he is to make any sort of headway.

Holbrooke's position was undermined before he began by a determined Washington lobbying campaign by the Indian government. According to a well-sourced account in Foreign Policy magazine, not denied by the White House, Barack Obama and his advisers were persuaded to drop their idea of creating a South Asia envoy whose remit would include India as well as Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Obama's shift came despite campaign pledges to seek "region-wide" solutions to the linked problems of terrorism, Islamist extremism, weapons proliferation, and poverty. Specifically, Obama suggested a future US envoy should address the problems of divided, majority-Muslim Kashmir, home to radical Islamists and source of long-running tensions and occasional fighting between India and Pakistan.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: Obama's First Right Step on Gitmo (Khaleej Times, UAE)

President Barack Obama did the right thing by closing the US prison at Guantanamo, Cuba, though he allowed a year for the process.

Obama ordered CIA’s network of secret, or ‘black,’ prisons closed, and torture to cease, ending one of the worst stains on America’s honour and a grave violation of international and US law.

The US conquered Cuba in the 1898 Spanish American War. Washington then installed a US citizen as president who granted Washington base rights to Guantanamo in perpetuity.

The US imposed a similar one-sided treaty on Panama. A century later, the US made a similar base deal in Afghanistan and perhaps in Iraq.

Obama should return the entire US base at Guantanamo to Cuba. This would be an excellent start to restoring US-Cuban relations.

President Obama’s next step in returning America to its senses: ending use of the propaganda terms, ‘terrorism,’ and ‘war on terror.’

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: Hope With Care (Khaleej Times, UAE)

Foreign policy is not made in a day, much less on Inauguration Day. The smiles that broke out in Delhi when President Barack Obama cautioned Pakistan that non-military aid would be cut if it did not curb domestic terrorism were premature.

In any case, it is military aid rather than civilian aid to Islamabad which should be of more concern to Delhi, but the government in Delhi has become so dependent on the United States that it gets pleased with very little.

An inaugural speech can only be peppered with markers that will slowly be fleshed into policy. But amateurs in Delhi have rushed to judgment where professionals fear to tread.

There was an air of simulation in the bluster with which Pakistan reacted. The boys of Islamabad know a charade when they see it; they are experts in the game themselves, after all. They don’t need spectacles to read between the lines of Obama’s South Asia policy.

Obama, still brimming with the audacity of hope, has promised peace all over the world and war in one corner: Afghanistan. Pakistan is not very competent in the disbursement of peace. Its expertise lies in the dissemination of war, by declaration or proxy, on enemy territory or the land of friends.

And now of course it is fighting more than one war on its own soil. Pakistan knows that America cannot fight in Afghanistan without force, intelligence and logistical support provided by Pakistan. As long as this material situation does not change, America needs Pakistan more than Pakistan needs America.

FULL ARTICLE

America's Favorite Boogeyman (Moscow Times, RUSSIA)

The fact that Russia is supposedly bad doesn't make the United States better -- or better off -- at the end of George W. Bush's presidency, when it is mistrusted by the world and is bogged down by two wars and a severe economic crisis. In this environment, is Russia a threat to the United States? Unlikely, but branding it as a dictatorship revives the old fears and diverts attention from the immense problems Washington faces today.

Barack Obama's presidency promises to usher his country into a new era of post-unilateral decision-making, international diplomacy and coherent foreign policy making. This new era should also, perhaps, end senseless public animosity toward Russia that has continued since 1991, when the Soviet Union lost the Cold War and disappeared.

Becoming the world's only superpower proved very damaging to the United States. It is no surprise that U.S. overconfidence bred hubris. In the 1990s, President Bill Clinton's administration tirelessly reminded the former Soviets that they, the losers, should unwaveringly follow the lead of the all-powerful United States. President Boris Yeltsin's privatization program was not speedy enough, at least as judged in a Washington anxious to spend as little as possible helping Russia. Any thoughts of a Marshall Plan to ease Russia's path were dismissed in Washington as welfare for the communists.

Russia is certainly far from perfect, and its current return to authoritarianism is not all, or even mostly, Washington's fault. But the economic arrogance from the Clinton era, coupled with the political egotism of the Bush years, was not a sound strategy, at least in terms of impact on Russia. Wagging the dog of Putinism can serve only one purpose -- to appeal to the familiarity of the communist threat in order to cover up the United States' own imperfections.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: Faith in Obama (Today's Zaman, TURKEY)

President Barack Obama is in the oval office after a gruesome race run not on personal popularity but against established prejudices and cleavages as well. We wish him the best of luck.

He will need an abundance of it even though he was swept into office riding on a wave of optimism. Americans seem to be confident that he can repair the economy and get over the crisis as evinced in the latest New York Times/CBS News poll. They are willing to give him enough time to carry out the repairs.

The electorate believes him, but their optimism is somewhat tempered by the colossal scale of the nation's problems at home and abroad, as the poll shows. Yet the new US president's cautious approach to recovery, as stated in his speeches, seems to have convinced the public that a gradual improvement in the economy can be achieved in a matter of years. The poll found that two-thirds of respondents think the economic recession will last two years or longer. In their opinion, the timeframe for economic recovery is not shorter that that for reforming the healthcare system or ending the war in Iraq. The previous government spawned these problems in a matter of eight years; the electorate feels that it is not reasonable to expect the new president to untangle these problems in an unrealistically short period of time.

FULL ARTICLE

Obama and the Terrorists (PORTUGAL News Online)

President Obama’s inauguration increases the likelihood of a major terrorist attack in the United States. That was the stark message of the South Waziristan Institute for Strategic Hermeneutics (SWISH), a think tank that offers strategic advice to some of the leading players in global politics.

SWISH warned in its mid-December report to Obama’s transition team that al-Qaeda “will attempt a 9/11-level attack, probably within the United States, at some point between now and mid-2010. If and when that happens, your country will require exceptional levels of political leadership if you are to avoid yet another misguided military response.”

Unfortunately, the South Waziristan Institute for Strategic Hermeneutics only exists in the fertile brain of British academic and strategic analyst Paul Rogers, who publishes its reports on the website of Open Democracy. Moreover, the Obama transition team did not ask for this report, although one devoutly hopes that they read it. Because the prediction is quite serious, as is all of SWISH’s work.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: U.S. Ups Ante with China (Globe and Mail, CANADA)

The Obama administration is showing a prompt and welcome boldness in trying to bring greater balance to the economic relationship between China and the United States. The Beijing government should heed what amounts to a call to let the value of the Chinese currency rise, which would increase the Chinese people's purchasing power.

In a letter this week to the Senate finance committee, answering senators' questions, Timothy Geithner, the treasury secretary-designate of the U.S., attributed to President Barack Obama himself the view that China is manipulating its currency.

Though the Bush administration had tried to persuade Beijing to raise the exchange rate of the Chinese yuan, it had refrained from using the verb “manipulate.” China yielded to a considerable extent, but the ascent of the yuan to what would be its true market level has since halted.

There can be no doubt that, by its large purchases over the years of U.S. treasury bills and other U.S.-dollar-denominated securities, Beijing has kept up the value of the American dollar and correspondingly made Chinese exports cheap. In effect, the undervalued yuan has been an export subsidy. Retailers such as Wal-Mart have benefited, but U.S. manufacturers have suffered, and it has been all too easy for U.S. federal budget deficits to accumulate.

FULL ARTICLE

The U.S.'s Middle-East Playbook (Asia Times, HONG KONG)

Lest United States President Barack Obama's opportunistic silence when Israel began the Gaza offensive that killed more than 1,400 Palestinians (more than 400 of them children) be misinterpreted, his aides pointed reporters to comments made six months earlier in the Israeli town of Sderot. "If somebody was sending rockets into my house, where my two daughters sleep at night, I'm going to do everything in my power to stop that," Obama had said in reference to the missiles Hamas was firing from Gaza. "I would expect Israelis to do the same thing."

Residents of Gaza might have wondered what Obama would have done had he been unfortunate enough to be a resident of, say, Jabaliya refugee camp. What if, like the vast majority of Gazans, his grandfather had been driven from his home in what is now Israel, and barred by virtue of his ethnicity from ever returning? What if, like the majority of the residents of this refugee ghetto-by-the-sea, he had voted for Hamas, which had vowed to fight for his rights and was not corrupt like the Fatah strongmen with whom the Israelis and Americans liked to deal?

FULL ARTICLE

A Man in a Hurry (Independent, UK)

The expectations that attended Barack Obama's arrival at the White House were stratospheric – not just in the United States, but around the world. It seemed impossible that he would be able to live up to them, and they still seem unrealistic. After only three full days as President, however, Mr Obama has given a whole meaning to the notion of hitting the ground running. Not only do George Bush's two terms already feel like the long distant past, but also a volley of signal measures has been announced, along with a striking list of key appointments.

It is not just the new President's frenetic pace that has impressed, but his choice of priorities and the clarity of the messages sent. He had occupied the Oval Office for only a matter of minutes, it seemed, before he called for the suspension of military tribunals at Guantanamo Bay. He followed up with executive orders announcing the closure of the hated prison camp within a year, along with all secret CIA detention centres. He also ordered a ban on interrogation methods widely regarded as torture. No other set of measures could have communicated so eloquently that this was an administration concerned to show a different face to the world.

On Thursday, accompanied by his Vice-President, he went in person to the State Department where he introduced Hillary Clinton, and watched as she presented the men he had appointed special envoys to two of the most troubled parts of the world: George Mitchell in the Middle East and Richard Holbrooke to South Asia. US diplomacy, Mr Obama was saying, had been wrested back from the Pentagon, and the State Department had full presidential support.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: The Decider Goes Home (Japan Times, JAPAN)

Mr. George W. Bush, the 43rd president of the United States, believes history will vindicate him. That thinking is typical of his presidency: It bespeaks an enduring optimism and faith in the future, a relentless refusal to bend to facts, and the certitude that his decisions, no matter how controversial, were right. That certitude tended to put belief ahead of fact. Will the future vindicate him?

Today the verdict is negative. There was a collective sigh of relief on Nov. 4, not only at the election of Mr. Barack Obama, but at the defeat of Sen. John McCain, a candidate whose views veered ominously close to those of the incumbent president, and the prospect of the departure of Mr. Bush himself.

At the time of the election, just 24 percent of Americans said they considered Mr. Bush's presidency a success. Today, there has been a slight rebound to 31 percent — "the typical nostalgia bump that most outgoing presidents get," explained one analyst. That is the lowest rating among all U.S. presidents in six decades of polling, save for that of Richard Nixon when he resigned.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: Capitalism’s Signpost: Unemployment (Tehran Times, IRAN)

By the end of December 2008, the United States’ non-farm employment declined sharply and the unemployment rate rose from 6.8 to 7.2 percent, its highest level in 16 years, according to the most recent report by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor. Payroll employment fell by 524,000 over the month of December, following the loss of 533,000 during the month of November. During the year 2008, the U.S. lost 2.6 million jobs according to the official report. Figures for unemployment in 2008 make the last year of the Bush administration the worst year for job losses since 1945 and intensify the pressure on President Obama and the Congress to pass a fiscal stimulus package that will raise the federal budget deficit to the incredible height of $1.2 trillion, which shoots the U.S. national debt as high as $10.5 trillion or 75% of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

In December, the number of unemployed persons in the U.S. climbed to 11.1 million. Since the start of the recession in December 2007, the number of unemployed workers has grown by 3.6 million and the unemployment rate has risen by 2.3 percentage points.

Among the total unemployed, 6.5 million were workers who were either long unemployed or had only part-time jobs before the start of the recession. The economic crisis has made the lot of this stratum of the work force worse than it has been in many decades. The number of long-term unemployed, i.e., those jobless for 27 weeks or more, reached 2.6 million in December. As of December 20, the number of Americans who were continuing to draw unemployment benefits went up by 140,000 to 4.5 million for the week. And more U.S. workers are expecting to be fired by mid-January. Argus Research economist Richard Yamarone said for many American workers the prospects for a better 2009 are nowhere in sight, adding that the number of jobless claims was at its highest since December 1982.

The signs of deterioration and deep cracks in the foundation of the U.S. economy can be found all around us, particularly in the financial, retail, and industrial sectors and, of course, the auto industry.

FULL ARTICLE

What About North Korea? (Asia Times, HONG KONG)

Korea remains the forgotten war. Just ask United States President Barack Obama. "For us," he declaimed at his inaugural, Americans "fought and died, in places like Concord and Gettysburg, Normandy and Khe Sanh".

Korea? The Chosun Reservoir, from which US Marines retreated in bloody defeat in "the coldest winter" of 1950-1951? The Pusan perimeter, which Americans defended against repeated North Korean assaults in the summer of 1950 before driving the invaders out of the south after the Inchon landing? Heartbreak Ridge and Pork Chop Hill - two of the hardest-fought battlegrounds of the Korean War? Forget it.

Clearly, Obama's policy-making and speech-writing crew made a calculated decision. One can imagine the thoughts coursing through the collective brains of the incoming doyens of the White House and National Security Council and their aides and advisers from the think-tanks:

"Nah, don't touch that one - might upset North Korea. Kim Jong-il might see a mention as advance build-up for a pre-emptive strike. Nah, North Korea's too sensitive, might throw off the nuke talks. Nah, we don't want South Korea thinking we're ready to support them with more arms." Or, just as likely, "Nah, nobody cares about Korea."

FULL ARTICLE

Obama: World Divider? (Guardian, UK)

The 47th president was sworn in on an unseasonably warm January day. President Gloria Evangelista, the first Hispanic and second woman president of the United States, took the oath on a Spanish-language bible held by her husband, Victor Chu. The controversy about Chu's lucrative lobbying contracts for Chinese companies was temporarily forgotten. Former president Barack Obama, his hair white since the traumatic last months of his second term in office, stood watching, sandwiched between his Republican predecessor, George Bush, and successor, Kitty McFarlane. The strange weather on this 20 January 2025 was attributed by many to the effects of global warming, which the Obama administration had vainly struggled to slow. In her inaugural speech, delivered partly in English and partly in Spanish, president Evangelista paid fulsome tribute to the Chinese-American strategic partnership, known colloquially as the G2.

So much has been said to locate Obama's "historic" (oh weary moniker) inauguration day in the long sweep of American history, but we should also view it in the perspective of a probable future. According to the latest projection from the United States' own National Intelligence Council, "by 2025, the international system will be a global multipolar one with gaps in national power continuing to narrow between developed and developing countries". This does not require that America will decline; only that others continue to rise. There was a hint almost of melancholy defiance in Obama's inaugural rallying cry: "We remain the most prosperous, powerful nation on earth. We remain ..."

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: A Fresh Tack on Pakistan (Times of INDIA)

Going by defiant statements from Islamabad that it will review its options vis-a-vis Washington if the Obama administration doesn't adopt a
positive policy towards it, it has clearly been rattled by the Obama administration's plans to rejig American policy towards Pakistan and Afghanistan. Foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi has gone to the extent of flashing a China card against India and the United States by asserting that Beijing would come to its aid if necessary.

The new US approach includes inducting 30,000 more American troops into Afghanistan, building an alternative route to supply them that passes through Russia and Central Asia instead of Pakistan, and pouring in non-military aid to Pakistan which will be tied to better performance in the war against terror. It's hard to see what's objectionable about this package. If the Americans are pouring in billions of dollars into Pakistan, it's legitimate to expect that Pakistan should, in return, cease to provide sanctuary to armed militants who cross the border into Afghanistan and attack NATO and Afghan troops there, not to mention terror groups which have targets all over the world. Neither has Islamabad done a good job of keeping the supply route that passes through western Pakistan open, as hundreds of NATO trucks have been burnt along this route. If the US doubles its troops in Afghanistan, it can't be expected to keep their sole supply route hostage to closure by the Taliban.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: Tell the U.S.: "No We Can't" (The AUSTRALIAN)

We all hope Barack Obama can rebuild the US's place in the world. But will that hope be fulfilled? To answer that, we need to do more than admire the new President. We must go back and look at what's gone wrong during the past eight years, because then can we say whether Obama has what it takes to overcome them.

For me, alas, the answer is no. The challenges to America's global position are not those of mere mismanagement. They arise from a profound mismatch between America's global objectives on the one hand and its power on the other, now and increasingly in the future.

To reconcile that mismatch, Obama needs to define new, more modest and more realistic and achievable objectives for his foreign policy.

This is not the way most Americans, including the new President, see the problem. Instead they blame the previous president. That's understandable enough. George W. Bush used American power so badly it seems natural to blame the setbacks of the past eight years on his errors. But America's problems are much bigger than Bush. His administration was arrogant, cynical, negligent, brutal and incompetent. But even if it had been wise and skilful, the aims Bush set for US policy were simply beyond the scope of US power to deliver, no matter how prudently and persuasively it was applied.

Consider Bush's key objectives: he committed the US to transforming Iraq, to rebuilding Afghanistan, to containing Russia, to disarming North Korea and Iran, and to sustaining US primacy in Asia in the face of China's rise.

He has failed in all of them, but would anyone else have done better? Bush's incompetence created America's problems in Iraq, but none of these other challenges are his fault. And no one - certainly not the new President - has any persuasive ideas about what new things the US can do to fix them that differ much from Bush's plans, or have any better prospects for success.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: A More Demanding President? (China Daily, CHINA)

The high hopes surrounding Barack Obama's presidency are mostly a good thing, as they remind us that much of the anti-American sentiment that is so apparent around the world is not and need not be permanent.

But this anticipation is also a problem for Obama, as it will be difficult - and in some instances impossible - for him to meet expectations. There will be no Palestinian state this spring; nor will there be a global climate change pact or a new trade accord or an end to poverty or genocide or disease anytime soon.

The reasons go beyond the reality that big accomplishments require time and effort. The new president faces extraordinary constraints - constraints that will make it essential for other countries to do more if stability and prosperity are to be the norm rather than the exception.

The most obvious limitation stems from the state of the US economy. Two million jobs disappeared in the last four months alone. The housing market continues to deteriorate. The Untied States' GDP is contracting at an almost unprecedented rate.

As a result, Obama will have no choice but to devote the lion's share of his time and attention to reviving the economy. More than anything else, his success in this domain will determine the perception of his administration. Even he acknowledges that this will require him to delay fulfilling several other campaign promises.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: Blaming China is Bizarre (China Daily, CHINA)

The ongoing global financial crisis, triggered by the bursting of the property bubble in the United States, has severely hit the world economy over the past year. No country, including fast-growing China, has been immune to the financial woes.

Global efforts are being mobilized to tackle the unprecedented financial tsunami. But former US treasury secretary Henry Paulson recently blamed China and other countries for causing an imbalance in the global economy and pushing the crisis with their high bank deposits. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke even claimed that such a high savings rate in foreign countries, in China in particular, had induced the bubble in the US real estate industry to bulge.

Such groundless criticisms from high-ranking US officials are extremely detrimental to the current worldwide battle against the crisis. They not only run counter to the simple economic principles, but have also confounded the relations between the victim and wrongdoer. These remarks also exhibit the obvious intention of the top US financial authorities to shirk their responsibilities for poor financial performances and shift domestic dissatisfactions to other countries.

FULL ARTICLE

Pakistan's Shift Alarms the U.S. (Asia Times, HONG KONG)

Karachi - Ongoing tension between India and Pakistan in the wake of the terror attack on the Indian city of Mumbai last November in which 179 people died at the hands of gunmen linked to Pakistan has clouded Islamabad's role in the United States-led "war on terror".

Mindful of this, US Central Command commander General David Petraeus paid a one-day visit to Pakistan on Tuesday. In meetings with senior officials, including army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kiani, Petraeus said that the US and the international community would continue to support Pakistan, but it needed "to put its house in order" on the issue of militants.

The US is already looking ahead to this year's round of fighting in Afghanistan against the Taliban-led insurgency once winter passes. Petraeus has committed to a surge in US troop numbers to about 60,000, but Pakistan's cooperation in dealing with militants based in its tribal areas is essential. The militants use these bases to support their operations in Afghanistan.

FULL ARTICLE

Seduced by the Saint (The AUSTRALIAN)

You know that something is amiss with rational judgment when economics Nobel laureate Amartya Sen describes events surrounding Barack Obama’s arrival as US President as “turning an exceptional human being into almost the kind of godhead that he has become”.

Sober analysts must be standing aside, wondering about the role of emotion in politics and its implications for critical scrutiny of Obama’s presidency. But many other observers have metaphorically cast aside their crutches and accepted that Obama has made them whole again.

To be sure, none of this is new. During Obama’s campaign, Hollywood types swooned at the sight of a good-looking, left-wing, articulate man of colour. And the media was equally seduced.

Back in September, The Guardian’s Jonathan Freedland, suffering that sinking feeling of four years ago when the Democrats lost, warned the US that the world would not tolerate a vote against Obama. “If Americans reject Obama, they will be sending the clearest possible message to the rest of us, and, make no mistake, we shall hear it.”

Mind you, it would be mean-spirited to complain about Freedland and the rest of the left-liberal media rejoicing in the inauguration today.

President Obama entered the history books our children will read. His presidency bookends an era that began with segregation between blacks and whites and ended when he became the 44th American president and the first black man in the White House. No one can take that away from him. Nor can anyone doubt his charisma or political skills.

However, the inauguration is just a moment in history.

FULL ARTICLE

A Fresh Start in the Muslim World (Japan Times, JAPAN)

President Barack Obama was the world's favored candidate in what was America's first global election. The key question is how the Obama administration will tap this rare good will to re-establish U.S. credibility and repair its reputation. How Obama manages issues in the Muslim world will determine the success or failure of his foreign policy because it is here that the greatest challenges lie, especially in dealing with the two U.S. war fronts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Relations between the United States and the Muslim world have long been deteriorating. People in the Islamic world ascribe this to U.S. policy over the years. Perceptions have been shaped by decades of an uneven approach that placed the security of Israel and the need for cheap oil above and beyond the concerns of others and justice for the Palestinians.

FULL ARTICLE

Demons and the US-Russia Relationship (Moscow Times, RUSSIA)

Many observers have written that the change in leadership in the United States will open up new opportunities for U.S.-Russian relations. It is hard to argue with this for the simple reason that bilateral relations could hardly get worse than they are now.

First, there is an extremely high level of mistrust between the two countries. Both sides have lost almost all desire to understand the motives behind the other.

Second, U.S.-Russian relations are completely out of balance. When leaders make their usual statements about common threats or the challenges facing both countries, their words ring hollow. Even in areas where the interests of both sides clearly coincide, there is no real progress because each side tries to "sell" its cooperation at a higher cost than the other does.

Third, the mechanisms for maintaining healthy relations have dwindled. The multifaceted communication between Russia and the United States that existed during the Soviet era and the 1990s has today been reduced to nothing but formal contacts and the exchange of demagoguery.

What's more, the relationship is lopsided.

http://www.moscowtimes.ru/article/1045/42/373748.htm

Morning of Hope and Goodwill in U.S. (The Independent, UK)

The long transition between an American election and the inauguration means that the actual import of the occasion can all too easily be taken for granted. Not this year. The excitement that has been mounting in Washington since the night of 4 November has radiated not only across the United States, but around the world.

At midday today, east coast time, power in the country that is still the world's richest and mightiest will be transferred, as the constitution decrees, to Barack Obama. Thanks to satellite television, it will be one of the most watched events ever – a truly global occasion, and a model of how democracy should work.

At 47, Mr Obama will not be the youngest President of the United States. But that is one of the few barriers he has not shattered on his triumphant progress to the White House. As the outsider, contesting the Democratic Party's nomination against Hillary Clinton, one of the best connected and best funded candidates on record, he ran an inspirational grassroots campaign. With his rhetorical gifts and his unique personal history, he mobilised young Americans and those of all ethnic backgrounds – some of the voters always hardest to reach. Imaginative use of the internet spread the word and brought in the money; he raised more and spent more than his rival.

FULL ARTICLE

Thank You, President Bush (Jerusalem Post, ISRAEL)

Here is a politically incorrect assessment: Today President George W. Bush will hand over to his successor a Middle Eastern foreign policy outlook far brighter than the one he inherited from Bill Clinton. The 44th US president will have in the Gulf area and beyond what No. 43 so desperately missed: freedom of action to react to upcoming crises.

To anybody who looks at a map of the greater Middle East and who remembers what it looked like eight years ago, it is obvious. When President Bush took over the Oval Office, he found Washington's Middle Eastern policy locked in an unsustainable position: double containment of Iraq and Iran, with Islamic radicalism in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere festering in the background. The situation in Iraq was unfinished and untenable. Neither the no-fly zones in the Kurdish north and the Shi'ite south of the country nor the UN-imposed sanctions could be upheld much longer. Large contingents of US troops were tied up in neighboring Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Washington found itself in a fix: Those troops could not stay forever, but withdrawing them would be tantamount to handing triumph to Saddam Hussein on a silver platter.

Double containment of Iraq and Iran was unsustainable, but had to be sustained all the same. For eight long years president Clinton had not known what to do about Iraq and had opted for the easiest way out: doing nothing.

FULL ARTICLE

Starting Fresh With Obama (Moscow Times, RUSSIA)

President-elect Barack Obama has formed his team of advisers, but it would be difficult to call them "friends of Russia." This reflects in part the cool relations Washington and Moscow have had for nearly eight years. No wonder the Kremlin is taking a close look at statements made by members of the new administration to discern whether Washington will support many of the same positions adopted by former U.S. President George W. Bush or if he will finally make changes to U.S. foreign policy that the whole world has long awaited.

Nobody in Russia is expecting that our relationship with Washington will improve overnight. Obama's team has more pressing issues to deal with in other parts of the world such as Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran. After an unsuccessful attempt to keep the United States as the unchallenged leader of a unipolar world, Washington will need the support of allies and partners more than ever. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton expressed this idea during her Senate confirmation hearing on Jan. 13: "America cannot solve the most pressing problems [in international affairs] on our own, and the world cannot solve them without America."

Russia's direct participation is required to solve many of these global problems, particularly in Eurasia, where the interests of both countries coincide.

FULL ARTICLE

Obama and the US-Japan Alliance (Japan Times, JAPAN)

Under the Bush administration, the Japan-U.S. alliance has undergone a quiet but important transformation in the eyes of most Japanese people: It has become a global alliance instead of a regional or bilateral one.

Such a transformation can be witnessed in at least two aspects: the strategic and the ideological. The strategic aspect was most clearly manifest in the role of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces in Iraq and in the Indian Ocean. Though they were not involved in military operations in combat areas, their role cannot be said to be limited to "peace building" in the narrow sense of the term.

The more important change in the alliance, though it was more subtle and invisible, was the alliance's bearing a more ideological tinge. The ideological aspect of the alliance has been much emphasized under the Bush-Koizumi-Abe period, particularly by the catchword of "sharing values," which later crystallized into Taro Aso's expression of the "arc of freedom and prosperity," which was assumed to stretch from Japan to Australia.

FULL ARTICLE

Global Crises Will Define Obama's Presidency (Der Spiegel, GERMANY

As president, Barack Obama must now translate his lofty words into concrete action. The economy is sliding deeper into crisis, the Middle East is increasingly unstable and the Republicans are waiting for his first mistakes.

Inauguration Day is a momentous occasion in the life of a new United States president. Since the days of George Washington, tradition has it that the man of the hour appears in festive attire to set the tone for a term of office filled with high ambitions. For a brief moment, politics are transformed into poetry.

Over the years, new presidents have been competing with each other to coin the historic phrases that will remain engraved in the collective consciousness of the nation.

FULL ARTICLE

A Monopoly on Blame (Moscow Times, RUSSIA)

It's an ironic parallel. For eight years, Presidents Vladimir Putin and George W. Bush have moved in tandem. Russia enjoyed two terms of Putin, whereas the United States had the pleasure of two terms of Bush.

But on Tuesday, the United States will move on. Bush will leave the nation depressed and dispirited, its economy stuck in the worst slump in nearly 80 years. Whether he will be judged by posterity as harshly as he has been by contemporaries or whether history will somehow exonerate him, he will be gone and his team in Washington will be replaced with new faces.

Not so in Russia. The country has had a new president for nearly a year, but Putin unquestionably remains the country's most powerful man. If he were to abdicate completely and become, as it has been rumored, the head of Gazprom, supreme power in Russia would likely migrate to the corner office of the state-controlled gas monopoly.

Since summer, Putin's legacy has begun to look as tarnished as Bush's in the United States. Putin offered a bargain to the Russian people: They would enjoy stability and growing prosperity but stay out of politics and away from big business in which Putin's friends, supporters and former siloviki colleagues were growing immensely rich. Now that the global crisis has undermined Russia's prosperity, the political model of the past decade is starting to strain. Even Putin's approval ratings are slumping.

Still, there is little chance that the political establishment will loosen its grip on power.

FULL ARTICLE

The Bush Legacy Gave Us Obama (Today's Zaman, TURKEY)

In theory, there should not be much to debate concerning how the Bush years will be remembered by history. After a catastrophic terrorist attack, two major wars and the return of depression economics, George W. Bush is leaving office with some of the lowest approval ratings for any American president in history. But if you want to find a bright side in all this, just think about what is going on today in American politics. Sometimes you need to hit rock bottom for radical change to happen. Simply put, Americans would never have elected an African-American president named Barack Hussein Obama had it not been for the Bush fiasco.

Self-correction and self-renewal are the most important assets of American democracy. And the Bush years have given us a lot to correct. This week, The Economist argued that the three most notable characteristics of the Bush presidency were partisanship, politicization and incompetence. I think "incompetence" should be singled out. After all, it is hardly unusual for governments to display a certain level of partisanship and politicization. Yet you don't have the level of mind-boggling incompetence displayed during the Bush years in most functioning Western governments. How else can one explain the decision to invade Iraq with only 150,000 troops and without planning for post-combat occupation? How else can one explain the response to Hurricane Katrina, which struck New Orleans in 2005?

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: The Welcome End of an Era (NEW ZEALAND Herald)

Posterity can be a capricious judge. Reputations of leaders hailed in their lifetimes, such as Winston Churchill and John F. Kennedy, have suffered from reappraisal after their deaths; lesser lights - the late Sir Robert Muldoon, for example, whose autocratic management hamstrung this country's economic growth - is remembered by too many as a lovable rascal.

But as George Walker Bush leaves office, he may be confident that history will, with good reason, look back at his stewardship with a shudder of revulsion.

Historians argue about whether the 43rd presidency has been the worst: the administrations of the dithering James Buchanan, the corrupt Warren Harding, and the foulmouthed, crooked Richard Nixon, the only president to resign, are often mentioned as contenders. But of none may it be said, as it can safely be said of Bush, that he accomplished nothing of merit and wrought havoc with the rest.

For all his protestations to the contrary in his final speeches, he has left the world a good deal worse off than he found it.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: Believing the Obama Hype (Telegraph, UK)

When Barack Obama takes office on Tuesday, it will be an event of enormous significance, not just for America but for the world. Rarely has so much been expected of a single politician. Rarely have the problems he was expected to solve been more intractable.

Mr Obama has already been credited with almost superhuman powers to transform America and the world. But in truth, the foreign policies he will pursue are unlikely to be radically different from those of his predecessor. His America will still be a staunch supporter of Israel and extremely hostile to Iran. He will continue "the war on terror", even if the rhetoric he uses to accompany that war changes. He will significantly expand America's commitment in Afghanistan, while winding down its operation in Iraq. He will close the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, but he will not release all of its inmates. What he will do with them is still an unsolved problem, as is the nature of the sort of trials they will be given – if, indeed, they are given trials at all.

As far as economic policy is concerned, Mr Obama proposes a gigantic, $800 billion stimulus package consisting of public works and tax cuts. Notoriously, Mr Bush, whose rhetoric was consistently against "big government", presided over the biggest expansion of the US government since the Second World War, when he bailed out the country's banks, mortgage companies and insurance companies.

For all that, Mr Obama's election marks a radical departure from the past, not least because he is the first African American to hold the office of President.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: Buy One Get One Free (The Australian)

Here is a thought experiment that does not take very much thought. Picture, if you will, Hillary Clinton facing a foreign policy conundrum. With whom will she discuss it first and most intently: with her president or her husband? (I did tell you this wouldn't be difficult.)

Here's another one: Will she be swayed in her foreign policy decisions by electoral considerations focusing on the year 2012 and, if so, will she be swayed by incoming president Barack Obama's interests or her own?

The next question, and I must apologise in advance for once again making it an unstrenuous one, is: Who else will be approaching Bill Clinton for advice, counsel and input on foreign affairs?

It appears from the donor list of the Clinton Foundation that there is barely an oligarch, royal family or special interest group anywhere in the world that does not know how to get the former US president's attention.

Just in the days since the foundation agreed to some disclosure of its previously confidential clients - in other words, since this became a condition for Hillary Clinton's nomination to become secretary of state - we have additionally found former president Clinton in warm relationships with one very questionable businessman in Malaysia and with another, this time in Nigeria, who used to have close connections with that country's ultracorrupt military dictatorship.

The Nigerian example is an especially instructive one. Gilbert Chagoury is a major figure in land and construction in that country and has contributed between $US1 million and $US5 million to the Clinton Foundation, as well as arranged a huge speaking fee for him at a Caribbean event and kicked in a large sum to his 1996 re-election campaign.

In return for this, he was received at the White House when Clinton was in power and more recently at Clinton-sponsored social events in New York and Paris.

FULL ARTICLE

Hillary Must Make Choices Quickly (Independent, UK)

The State Department, Hillary Clinton declared at her Senate confirmation hearing this week, would be "firing on all cylinders" the moment she takes over as the country's top diplomat. It will need to be. Rarely has a new administration come to office with a more daunting foreign policy in-tray.

On issues ranging from Iraq to Afghanistan, from Iran to Darfur, from the tortuous nuclear negotiations with North Korea to policy towards an evermore assertive and nationalist Russia, the incoming Obama team must quickly make important choices – at a moment when its top priority is, inevitably, the domestic economic crisis.

But a key test of the new administration's intentions will come virtually on Day One, with its response to the bloody fighting in Gaza that has made a Middle East settlement even more remote. Both Barack Obama himself and Mrs Clinton have thus far kept their cards close to their chest, insisting that George W Bush alone is in charge of the United States' foreign policy until noon on 20 January.

But some signs have emerged that the US will take a more sympathetic line to the Palestinians. In her confirmation hearings, Mrs Clinton stressed the "tragic humanitarian costs" borne by Gaza's population, and indicated that the Obama administration, unlike its predecessor, would be vigorously involved in Middle East peacemaking from the start.

FULL ARTICLE

Ahmadinejad: Obama regime 'hostile' to Gazans (AFP, FRANCE)

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Friday accused the incoming government of US president-elect Barack Obama of hostility towards the people of Gaza, which is under Israeli attack.

"Many analysts believe that hostility towards people of Gaza is a completely American plan and that it is from the new US administration," Ahmadinejad told a summit in Doha, according to Iranian state television.

Obama will take office on January 20.

"What has been seen is that no changes have taken place, enmity has doubled and the new leaders are following the previous policies," Ahmadinejad said about Washington's new administration.

"The new US administration has made some comments about changing its stance on Palestine. These changes had better be to condemn the Zionist regime not supporting it," he added.

Ahmadinejad's new comments appear to differ from what he told a press conference in Tehran on Thursday.

"If changes are fundamental, genuine and based on respect... we wait and see and do not make premature judgement," he said when asked about Tehran's stance toward normalisation of ties with Washington.

Iran is a staunch supporter of the Islamist Hamas movement, which controls the Gaza Strip, and does not recognise its archfoe Israel.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: History Unkind to Bush Era (New Zealand Herald, NZ)

The great American presidents have earned their reputations in times of crisis. Think of George Washington, at the nation's founding, Abraham Lincoln and the Civil War, and Franklin D. Roosevelt during the Great Depression and World War II. All three united the populace, governed astutely and delivered heightened security. George W. Bush also faced a time of crisis early in his eight-year tenure when terrorists plunged airliners into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

As his term ends, his great boast is that he spared the United States a repeat of the September 11 attacks. Such a claim will never see him mentioned in the same breath as Lincoln or Roosevelt. But, arguably, it is one that entitles him to more plaudits than are now being directed his way.

The problem for President Bush, however, and the reason some historians have already labelled him the worst president in US history, is the cost of safeguarding American soil. After rallying the nation superbly, so much so that at one stage he enjoyed 90 per cent approval, he perpetrated one blunder after another. The most calamitous was the invasion of Iraq, an unprovoked act that appalled many of America's traditional allies. Even the President, a man averse to admitting error, conceded this week that not finding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was a "significant disappointment".

FULL ARTICLE

Korean and American Politics (Korean Times, KOREA)

Well, it seems that the Korean National Assembly is back to work again. Prior to this it appeared that the governing Grand National Party (GNP) seemed to have taken a hint from the U.S. House of Representatives during the Bush administration.

The first time they seemed to copy the American republicans was when they attempted to impeach then President Roh Moo-hyun in a similar fashion to what the U.S. Congress tried to do to Bill Clinton after the Lewinsky affair.

With the election of George W. Bush in 2000, and with Republican control of the House of Representatives, the Republican U.S. Congress attempted to ramrod its own legislative measures through, by excluding democrats from committee meetings and combining smaller bills into huge ``omnibus" bills with no chance for debate or discussion, let alone giving the members of Congress time to read the entire bill or even any portion of it.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: How Canada Can Greet Obama (Globe & Mail, CANADA)

Canada is fortunate to be the first country on the dance card of America's new president. Although no date has been set, Barack Obama's visit is likely to come soon after his inauguration next Tuesday. This meeting will be critical to charting a new course in Canada-U.S. relations. It provides an opportunity not only to put our relationship on the right footing but also to elevate its tone from one that is "correct" to truly inspired.

If the meeting between Mr. Obama and Prime Minister Stephen Harper is to be a success, however, Canada will have to show the new president that we are a nimble and dependable partner. If we are clumsy and flat-footed, another opportunity to set the beat will not come any time soon. To ensure success, Mr. Harper and his officials will have to follow some basic rules.

FULL ARTICLE

Obama's Pro-Israel Congressional Welcome (Daily Star, LEBANON)

If the Israeli attack on Gaza that started 18 days ago was designed partly to send a message to the incoming Barack Obama, the United States Congress in the past week seems to have joined the battle to handcuff the new president and lay down the law for him, even before he takes office.

Obama has tried to remain aloof and stay out of the political battle over the Gaza war by making no substantive statements about it. Israel and its supporters in Washington have different plans. Obama has stayed away from the war, but they brought the war to him - shoving it down his throat as his first pre-incumbency lesson in how American presidents must behave with respect to Israel's desires, if they wish to remain in power.

The House of Representatives voted last Friday by 390-5 for a resolution that backed Israel in its Gaza onslaught, affirming "Israel's right to defend itself against attacks from Gaza." A day earlier, the Senate overwhelmingly supported Israel and its right to defend itself against terrorism.

Such extraordinary one-sided support for Israel by Congress mirrors the same position taken by the administration.

FULL ARTICLE

Brace Yourself Obama (Times of India, INDIA)

It's less than a week to go before Barack Obama is formally sworn in as the 44th president of the United States of America. A rush of excitement is sweeping across the US in anticipation of the historic event. The world, too, is waiting for Tuesday's inauguration, when a man many believe can transform the way Washington does business will take charge. For the past four months, ever since Obama won America's mandate, there has been a sort of vacuum in Washington necessitated by the long handover ritual and America has not been able to essay an authoritative role in its foreign policy on today's burning global problems.

Some of the sheen surrounding Obama's spectacular victory will wear off as he rolls up his sleeves and gets down to the business of governing. Fixing America's economy is going to be a messy and contentious affair. Even more challenging for Obama's team, however, will be the task of addressing the threats posed by two dangerous flashpoints in Pakistan and the Middle East.

Obama has repeatedly stated his concerns about Pakistan's role in the terrorism industry, which is a welcome recognition of reality. In dealing with Pakistan, Obama will have to summon up a fine balance of creative and firm options. America needs Pakistan's assistance in its battle against the Taliban in Afghanistan, never mind how suspect Pakistan's record is in delivering on promises of cooperation. But Washington cannot afford to let Islamabad allow extremists operating from Pakistani soil run amok either.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: America’s Regional Strategy Takes Off (The Hindu, INDIA)

Washington’s regional strategy in Southwest Asia involves negotiating interlocking “grand bargains” that aim at pacifying Iraq and Afghanistan and restoring stability to the Greater Middle East.

Last week, Washington apparently showed India a big favour, “de-hyphenating” its relationship with Pakistan and India. The Nelson Report, the matchless daily chronicler of men and matters in Washington DC, reported on Monday that top diplomat Richard Holbrooke would be the new administration’s special envoy for India and Pakistan. The New York Times corroborated this information.

In the event, however, it seems Mr. Holbrooke will be special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan only — apart from “related regional issues.” From all appearances, the Barack Obama administration will not “hyphenate” India and Pakistan.

But Indian diplomacy needs to tread softly.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: Obama's Other War on Terror: Mexico (Telegraph, UK)

The note left next to the severed heads of the eight soldiers and state police chief was chillingly direct. "For each of mine that you kill, I will kill 10 soldiers," it read.

It sounds like the sort of gruesome tactic deployed by Islamic terrorists in Iraq. But this horrific scene occurred last month near the main road from Mexico City to the popular tourist destination of Acapulco on the Pacific coast. The soldiers were kidnapped as they left a nearby military barracks and then decapitated in apparent revenge for an army firefight with a narcotics gang in a nearby town that left three drug smugglers dead.

Mexico's rapidly escalating drug wars claimed nearly 6,000 lives last year in a country more commonly associated with sun, sand and ancient ruins than narco-terrorism. Much of the bloodshed is concentrated along the US-Mexican border, where the violence is spilling across the 2,000 miles of shared frontier. Beheaded and mutilated corpses and mass graves turn up on a near-daily basis, often in the heart of cities such as Cuidad Juarez and Tijuana, once-thriving border communities that are now the terrifying fiefdoms of the cartels.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: Nothing Became Bush like Leaving (Independent.ie, IRELAND)

George Bush most certainly will not go down in history as one of the great American presidents. When he vacates office next week, he will leave his country in one of its worst-ever economic and financial crises and with its standing in the world at its lowest point in decades.

That, naturally, is not how he sees himself. At his final press conference yesterday, he made a stout defence of his record. With that he mingled acknowledgment of some of his most egregious mistakes -- and a touch of humour when he mocked one of his own notorious verbal blunders, telling reporters that they "misunderestimated" him.

The nearest he came to an apology was a reference to the appalling mishandling of the Hurricane Katrina aftermath. He does not appear to understand fully the import of the more serious mistakes which he admitted.

He knows he was wrong to claim "Mission Accomplished" when the worst chapters of the Iraq tragedy were still in the future. He does not know how misguided he was in the whole enterprise. And he has not repudiated the absurd description of North Korea, Iran and Saddam Hussein's Iraq as "an axis of evil". They never formed an axis of any kind.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: CIA a Stormy Sea with Panetta (China Post, TAIWAN)

Obama continues to surprise, in different ways. The selection of Leon Panetta by the President-elect to head the Central Intelligence Agency was unexpected for an incoming administration which has emphasized change but so far made relatively noncontroversial appointments. Although a very experienced Washington veteran, including service as Chief of Staff for President Bill Clinton, Panetta lacks direct intelligence credentials.

Simultaneously, providing some professional and political balance, retired Admiral Dennis Blair has been named to serve as Director of National Intelligence, to provide overall supervision of intel activities. The president-elect indicated he plans to bolster this position. This matter has very direct implications for Asia, where American intelligence organizations have had a wide range of different engagements and experiences.

FULL ARTICLE

Afghans Rue Bush's "War on Terror" (Al Jazeera, QATAR)

On the day George Bush, the US president, ends his period in office, millions of Afghans will be battling the bitter cold of winter and possible starvation.

Eight years after Bush launched his "war on terror" following the September 11 attacks, much of the human cost of it remains under-reported. Increased fighting in the country has gradually decreased the ability of the UN, humanitarian agencies and NGOs to deliver basic services to the most vulnerable Afghans.

The UN now categorises 79 of the 364 districts of the country as areas of "extreme risk," and international staff almost never travel by road. The lack of access is likely to increase in the short term, further debilitating the delivery of basic services like food, health and education. Not only is the country facing a worsening security situation, but even the best case scenario, which sees hope in the influx of additional troops next year, predicts increased fighting and greater violence in the short term.

During his recent visit to Afghanistan, his last one scheduled before he leaves office, Bush spoke of the challenges ahead but said the situation had improved since the Taliban were removed from power by US forces in 2001.

"You know, I was thinking ... how much Afghanistan has changed since I have been the president. Sometimes its hard when you're in the midst of a difficult situation, it's hard to get perspective. In 2002 the Taliban were brutally repressing the people of this country. I remember the images of women being stoned, or people being executed in the soccer stadium because of their beliefs. There was a group of killers that were hiding here and training here and plotting here to kill citizens in my country."

However, for many Afghans, 2001 no longer remains a valid comparison, as worsening security, disappointed hopes and increasing economic challenges erode the goodwill of the initial years of the government of Hamid Karzai, a government that Afghans say, was selected by the US.

Obama Softens Guantanamo Pledge (Al Jazeera, QATAR)

Barack Obama, the US president-elect, has appeared to soften his election campaign promise to shut the US detention camp in Guantanamo Bay as one of his first acts as US president, saying its closure would be "a challenge".

"It is more difficult than a lot of people realise ..." Obama said during an interview aired on Sunday with US broadcaster ABC.

"I think it's going to take some time ... but I don't want to be ambiguous about this - we are going to close Guantanamo," he told the This Week programme.

Sunday also marked the seventh anniversary of the first prisoners arriving at Guantanamo.

Demonstrations calling for the closure of Guantanamo Bay occurred around the world on Sunday. Amnesty International, the international rights organisation, held a protest outside the US embassy in Madrid, the Spanish capital, calling on Obama to investigate allegations of abuse at the prison.

Rallies also took place in Montreal, London and Lima, in Peru.

In Washington DC organisers of a protest said that 60 protesters had also begun a nine-day fast in support of Obama keeping his promise to close the prison.

The Cuba-based camp, which has been widely criticised amid reports of inmates being tortured and abused, was opened in 2002 to hold prisoners captured during the Bush administration's so-called "war on terror" in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Among problems to be dealt with are how the US legally resolves ongoing military tribunals and the fate of about 60 detainees that US officials have approved for transfer to their home countries, Obama said.

FULL ARTICLE

Bush's Legacy and Can-U.S. Relations (Globe & Mail, CANADA)

George W. Bush is already ranked by historians, pundits, scholars, scuba divers and bellhops as an appalling president. His any remaining narcissism has surely been obliterated, so no need to pile on. But in the continental context, there's his impact on Canada. How does he measure up in bilateral terms against other presidents?

The news isn't good. Mr. Bush may well go down as the worst president Canada ever knew. His chief bilateral legacy is something that cuts at the core of the relationship: his introduction of barriers at the border. Europe and Asia have been breaking down boundaries. But North America - as Michael Kergin, a former Canadian envoy to Washington, has pointed out - is "moving in a direction opposite to that of the rest of the world."

After 9/11, beefed-up border security was necessary. Seven years on, much less so. But instead of easing regulations over time, Mr. Bush's Department of Homeland Stupidity has been increasing them, bringing in passport requirements and other security measures. Canada's position was that we can trust one another. But Ottawa's initiatives to create a smart-border system with pre-clearance facilities and other measures critical to commerce have been largely rejected by Washington. The Bush White House has even had designs on introducing fingerprinting at the border.

Other presidents have had their moments when it came to Canada, but not as many as Mr. Bush.

FULL ARTICLE

Few Speak up for Palestinians in US Congress (Jordan Times, JORDAN)

Many voices around the world speak up for the Palestinians, but few in the US Congress.

Lawmakers in Washington routinely pass nonbinding resolutions supporting Israel during Middle East crises. The Senate has backed Israel's ongoing battle against Hamas in the Gaza Strip and the House of Representatives is expected to follow suit soon.

Even US lawmakers who express sympathy for the Palestinians hesitate to call themselves pro-Palestinian and they voice strong support for the security of Israel as well, hewing to decades of close US-Israeli ties.

"When these events occur, there's almost a knee-jerk reaction of Congress that endorses 1,000 per cent what Israel is doing," said Nick Rahall, a West Virginia Democrat and Lebanese-American who has voted against some of the measures.

"Israel is our ally. ... It always has been, with which I perfectly agree. But I don't believe in allowing that to blind us to what is in our best interests, or giving knee-jerk approval to anything Israel does. We don't do that with any other ally," he told Reuters.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: The Media War Over Gaza (Tehran Times, IRAN)

“We are all Hamas,” screamed a scrawny Mauritanian, repeatedly, as he determinedly drew his face closer to a TV camera. Behind him, thousands more tunefully chanted similar words, chants that were heard in different Arabic dialects, in fact in many different languages all across the globe.

Yet, Israel, somehow is claiming victory in the media war, which it calculatedly unleashed weeks before its most violent attack on Gaza yet. Thousands of Gazans have been reportedly killed and wounded in the first two weeks, starting December 27, in the tiny (roughly 140 square miles) yet densely populated (1.5 million people) stretch of land.

“Whenever Israel is bombing, it is hard to explain our position to the world,” said Avi Pazner, former Israeli ambassador to Italy and France, and “one of the officials drafted in to present Israel’s case to the world media,” according to the Jewish Chronicle. “But at least this time everything was ready and in place.”

FULL ARTICLE

You've Been a Great Audience (Mail & Guardian, SOUTH AFRICA)

The gaffes, the gibberish, the gurning. Admit it: there's a part of him you're going to miss. Oliver Burkeman on Bush's comic legacy.

In the modern TV era, to elect a president -- or even just to observe US politics from overseas -- is to invite him and his family into your home for at least four years, and to learn altogether too much information about their lives. Bill Clinton's sexual activities are only the most lurid example of this; in some ways, revelations of Jimmy Carter's habit of reading Bible passages to his wife at bedtime were just as personal. Yet as the administration of George Bush reaches its final days, it's hard to escape the conclusion that even the last eight horribly eventful years haven't succeeded in revealing the character of the man. You can, of course, call him a warmonger, or a liar, or a stooge of the super-rich, or someone with reckless disregard for his compatriots faced with natural disaster. But these are labels, not descriptions of his internal life. Despite countless biographies and speculative newspaper and magazine articles, we're barely any closer to answering the question that seemed pertinent back before Florida, before 9/11, before Iraq or Katrina: what, exactly, is going on in there?

During Bush's first campaign in 2000, the consensus among many liberals was that he was an idiot, a barely literate simpleton in the Chauncey Gardiner mould. Many of the greatest Bushisms date from those early days. "Rarely is the question asked: is our children learning?" a windcheater-clad Bush noted during a campaign stop in South Carolina, a couple of weeks before inviting a New Hampshire audience to imagine themselves in the shoes of a single mother "working hard to put food on your family".

FULL ARTICLE

Their Deficit, Our Perspective (Globe & Mail, CANADA)

Close your eyes. Assume that, in just over two weeks, Prime Minister Stephen Harper's budget warns that the country faces deficits of around $100-billion "for years to come."

It would be a nightmare scenario for Canada. Deficits at that level would eclipse by far what Canada experienced at its worst deficit years in the late 1980s and early 1990s. It would mean deficits much higher as a share of national income than in those years.

We all should remember or learn what those deficits that stretched from the mid-1970s and ended only in 1995 brought or contributed to Canada: higher taxes, lower government spending, huge interest payments, lower private and public sector investment, stagnating productivity.

Year after year, until the Liberals stopped the deficits in the mid-1990s, governments pledged to dig Canada out of the fiscal hole, only to dig an even deeper hole. Every budget during those years, Liberal and Conservative governments pledged to restrain, reduce and eventually eliminate deficits. They never did.

The $100-billion figure would be the very rough Canadian equivalent to what president-elect Barack Obama is proposing for the United States. Mr. Obama warned Americans this week to get ready for "trillion-dollar deficits for years to come."

What a long way Mr. Obama has come in such a short time.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: Desperately Seeking Signs of Hope (Toronto Star, CANADA)

Over the next 12 days leading up to the inauguration of Barack Obama as U.S. president, there will be much talk about hope in America.

Obama swept to victory with his campaign of "hope," a theme that resonated with Americans fed up with the Bush administration, worried about their jobs, savings and homes, and who were frustrated by the ongoing war in Iraq.

Despite the daily barrage of bad news though, there's a sense of hope in America with Obama's inauguration, set for Jan. 20.

Indeed, a recent Washington Post-ABC News poll indicated 68 per cent of Americans are optimistic about Obama and his policies.

In Canada, however, hope has largely gone missing.

Here, Canadians are bracing for the worst. Layoffs, falling house prices, shattered retirement dreams, disappearing savings all contribute to a sense of despair.

Just yesterday, there was more negative news, with some of Canada's top economists predicting our economy in 2009 will be in even worse shape than it was in 2008.

Where Canada differs from the U.S., though, is that few of us appear optimistic or hopeful that our politicians and our dysfunctional Parliament, which reopens six days after Obama is sworn in, will change and work together to make things better for us.

FULL ARTICLE

Use of Force Against Israel? (Jakarta Post, INDONESIA)

As Israel refuses to stop its use of force against Gaza, the question becomes, "what can the International community do?"

The United Nations' Security Council is trying to pass a resolution condemning Israel's action. So far, however, this effort has been to no avail and will remain so as long as the United States is there exercising its veto power, as they consider any resolution against Israel unfair for focusing on Israel's actions and not Hamas'.

If a resolution is passed it will certainly not authorize the use of force against Israel. It would be a different story of course if it was Iran or the past Iraq who were using force. The U.S. would make sure a resolution was passed without any hesitation.

Many see this as a double standard of U.S. foreign policy. The events of the past week confirm that Might is Right, that those possessing power will prevail in international community.

There are at least three reasons why force should be used against Israel.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: Obama Meets the World (Daily Times, PAKISTAN)

The US can become a smart power by once again investing in global public goods. That means support for international institutions, aligning America with the cause of international development, promoting public health, increasing cultural exchanges, maintaining an open economy, and dealing seriously with climate change.

Many people will try to set President Barack Obama’s priorities, but one person is sure to have a major effect. George W Bush has bequeathed an unenviable legacy: an economic crisis, two wars, a struggle against terrorism, and problems across the Middle East and elsewhere. If Obama fails to fight these fires successfully, they will consume his political capital, but if all he does is fight them, he will inherit Bush’s priorities. The new president must deal with the past and chart a new future at the same time.

Foremost on Obama’s agenda will be the economic crisis, where his domestic and international priorities intersect. He will need to stimulate the economy and avoid protectionist pressures at home, while also taking the lead in restructuring the global financial system. Cooperation with others will be essential. That Bush convened a G-20 meeting in November sets a useful precedent of going beyond the G-7 to include emerging economies such as China, India, and Brazil.

In second place must be America’s two current wars. . .

FULL ARTICLE

OP-ED: A Slate of Arab Woes (Daily Star, LEBANON)

On January 20, the Obama foreign policy team will inherit from the Bush administration an increasingly unstable Arab world. The more than 300 million Arabs in 22 countries, with the rare exception of a few Gulf nations, are lagging behind most of the world and are becoming vulnerable to unrest.

Presiding over anemic economies and poor educational systems, entrenched Arab leaders have failed to educate their citizens to participate effectively in a globally competitive economy. Average unemployment is hovering around 15 percent, higher than all other regions in the world except Sub-Saharan Africa. About 30 percent of all Arabs are believed to be illiterate. These facts describe a potentially scary scenario for the not-so-distant future, especially when one adds to the mix the fact that 60 percent of the region's population is under 30 years of age.

FULL ARTICLE

Obama's Taiwan Test (Asia Times, HONG KONG)

Taiwan remains one of the most sensitive and divisive issues between the United States and China. What should Chinese President Hu Jintao expect from Barack Obama when he is president on this critical issue? Until the new president is sworn in and key personnel are confirmed, the new administration’s policy will remain uncertain.

Moreover, the overall framework as well as detailed policies will emerge gradually; a comprehensive policy statement on Taiwan is unlikely to be issued. Nevertheless, it may be useful to make some predictions. Below are eight policy objectives that are likely to be pursued by the Obama administration. They represent the musings of an independent scholar and interested observer with no special inside knowledge or access to the president-elect. [For details on each point, click through at the bottom.]

1. Promote positive-sum relations among the US, China, and Taiwan
2. Repair and strengthen US-Taiwan relations
3. Encourage further improvement in cross-strait relations
4. Make no changes in the "one China" policy, but possibly modify the rhetoric
5. Call for China to reduce its military deployments opposite Taiwan
6. Firmly support greater participation by Taiwan in international organizations
7. Maintain a robust security relationship with Taiwan
8. Support Taiwan’s democratic system

FULL ARTICLE

Obama Should Speak up Now in Support of Israel (Jerusalem Post, ISRAEL)

Napoleon Bonaparte once defined a leader as "a dealer in hope." But Americans and Israelis yearning for leadership amid crisis from the incoming American president, who during the 2008 campaign was the great purveyor of hope, have thus far been sorely disappointed.

As missiles continue raining down on southern Israel, and the IDF's Gaza campaign enters its second week, only a conspicuous silence has emanated from President-elect Barack Obama's private Hawaii vacation compound.

While President George W. Bush, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and their spokespeople have unequivocally backed Israel's actions and blamed Hamas for abrogating the cease-fire, Obama has declined comment, saying instead that "there's only one president at a time." David Axelrod, Obama's chief strategist, told CBS News that "the Bush administration has to speak for America now" and that "it wouldn't be appropriate for me to opine on these matters." Incoming Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has maintained a similar reticence.

BUT THE Obama team's silence on this important issue is as surprising as it is unfortunate. In the immediate wake of his election, Obama proactively built a team designed to resuscitate the ailing US economy and reassured Americans - while ruffling the Bush administration's feathers - that "help is on the way." Obama presumably acted to calm the markets and to restore the confidence of those who had lost their jobs or retirement savings.

FULL ARTICLE

OP-Ed: Gaza will Explode if US Stays on Sidelines (Telegraph, UK)

Nothing abhors a vacuum more than military conflict, and the inability, or unwillingness, of the outgoing Bush administration to provide clear leadership over the deepening crisis in Gaza could very easily result in a serious escalation of hostilities.

So far as the Israeli-Palestinian issue is concerned, President George W. Bush is ending his eight-year tenure at the White House very much as he began it, by studiously avoiding any political investment in a dispute that has provided his predecessors with scant reward. True, Mr Bush did, at an early stage in his presidency, unveil the "road map" for a lasting agreement, and his administration later took the historic step of committing Washington to a two-state solution.

But apart from his fruitless appeals for the combatants to observe the conditions of the negotiating framework, whether it was calling on Israel to halt settlement construction or on the Palestinians to cease attacks on Israel, Mr Bush's default position has invariably been to side with Israel the moment trouble flared.

FULL ARTICLE