Any hopes for the coming years? [Archives:2004/788/Opinion]

Many of those who earnestly saw the George W. Bush Presidency as a deviation from the direction that the United States was to embark on following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War to say the least, the latest victory in the Presidential Elections simply defied logical political explanation. The reactions of Americans, who this observer saw as being inclined towards such a feeling, on the results of the election started with a total acceptance and hope that the second Bush II Administration could pursue a path that will render it “a place in history” as the New York Times editorialized. There were more expressions of disappointment voiced by more outspoken critics of the President Bush's first go at it, and all the consequential stark realities, which they saw as being created by an unusually incomprehensible adherence to a well-defined agenda. Some of the more progressive of these American critics even called for “street” action to make it clear that America's will should simply not be allowed to be dictated by servitude to narrow interests that do not take to heart the welfare and the true feelings that Americans should really have. Whatever could be said about the recent Bush victory, one is still at a loss in trying to define the real determinant that allowed an Administration that never really offered a clearly transparent prognosis of what the agenda that it has embarked on truly entails to overcome considerable partisan and non-partisan opposition that challenged its hopes of carrying on for another term. The close results of the two candidates, George Bush and John Kerry, surely indicated that a formidable opposition to the Bush Agenda was there, but somehow lacked the moving power reach the mass American electorate. Some allude this to the powerful right wing machinery that has evolved over the last fifty years in the United States, further instilled by the last four years of the Bush Presidency. This machinery had access to unlimited assured funding, a strong and effective presence in most of the media channels and a well organized institutional framework that was coherent and well coordinated, and ready at all times to withstand any serious political or genuine challenges from civil society or more liberally oriented media. To many observers, especially outside the United States, the results clearly showed that most Americans went along with the Bush Administration, because the American right wing successfully projected itself as the only right American orientation. By a total reliance on what the right perceives as proper national sentiment, many Americans seemed to feel that the right wingers in the Bush Administration guaranteed their safety. The 9/11 attacks may have instilled in the hearts of these Americans an aura of fear, thanks to a continuous bombardment by the right of this tragic event to the American public. This was further projected by a view that only America's might could deal with any possible recurrence, even if that might by itself should be the only guarantee. The question of how this might should be used did not seem to bother most of the voters, who were persuaded by this course, Apparently many Americans had confidence in their leadership's abilities to set out the modus operandi and could not perceive their leaders' as possibly serving ulterior motives along the way towards guaranteeing the nation's security. On the other hand, it was obvious that many Americans were not equipped with the right dose of awareness on the make-up and historical developments that shape the rest of the world outside the United States. There are many misconceptions and prejudices that have yet to be addressed among the American voting public, much of which is actually institutionally inspired by religious organizations (please see http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news1104/ramadan.html for some of the worst examples of such bigotry). Some of this also is reflective of an incomplete cultural and educational achievement on the part of many Americans, who may have reached an advanced level of professional or specialized knowledge in some fields, but are not able to discern the complexities and the dynamics that make up the world at large.
In the international community, one is bound to find a world that will expect no fundamental change in a Second Bush Administration. There is even some disillusionment and worry that the world will see more difficulty in dealing with the various issues that affect the world at large, because the Bush Administration has already set its orientation on these issues, much of which is contrary to international inclinations, and often viewed as reactionary.
For the Arab World, the reaction was somewhat indicative of a high degree of despair. The Israelis will still continue the almost unlimited blind support to the extremist right wing Israeli Government of Ariel Sharon, which the first Bush Administration was so unabashedly generous with and Iraq will be the theater for more bloodshed and uncertain political directions. Not that the Arabs were hopeful that a Kerry victory would have brought significant changes in American foreign policy towards these two issues, except for the hopes of some continuation of the unsuccessful efforts of President Clinton to achieve a lasting peace. Any hopes of a foreseeable settlement of the Palestine problem have been rendered almost impossible by the Sharon mess created over the last three and a half years, and Kerry was not expected to be carrying the magic wand that will undo so much bitterness and pain caused by the severest illegal occupation of modern times.
The efforts of Prime Minister to shed guidance on a needed course for the Middle East were noted, but one also recalls that Mr. Blair had made similar recommendations at the start of the first Bush Administration and apparently were received with deaf ears by the White House.
One should still however continue to have hope that the American public will find it necessary to get the second Bush Administration more responsive to international opinion and to correcting some of the excesses that were notoriously witnessed by the First Bush Administration, notably in the areas of human rights and civil liberties. That, one hopes, is still a serious matter for Americans to take note of, since that is what once was viewed as America's shining message to the world.
——
[archive-e:788-v:13-y:2004-d:2004-11-08-p:opinion]