Ayoon wa Azan (Rather a Burden )
Jihad el Khazen Al Hayat - 22/07/08//
Senator Barack Obama's tour in the Middle East and Europe might have been foreign, but its reasons were purely domestic. It is a US political tour to win over voters and prove all accusations of inexperience wrong. As a matter of fact, Senator John McCain levels this charge at his rival on a daily basis. He had previously ridiculed Obama for not having visited Afghanistan even once and for having made one single trip to Iraq in 2006. Yet Obama has announced his foreign policy before going on foreign tours and not the opposite.
As he embarked on this trip for electoral reasons, Obama only brought with him US journalists, totally ignoring the world press. Being a rock star, while McCain is rather a burden, he was escorted by three of the most important news presenters in the US television. McCain, on the other hand, was accompanied by reporters covering the news of the region.
Personally, I do not hold Obama accountable for every word he says in his electoral campaign or in his foreign tour. He would undoubtedly utter anything that would help him win the presidency. I was angry at first when he outdid all contenders and said during the AIPAC (Jewish lobby) - or the known spy nest - conference that Jerusalem must remain the undivided capital of Israel. Then I saw him step back to "explain" and change his position. In Israel, he will certainly try to dispel the doubts hovering over his support for the Jewish state. In the same vein, he will try to convince President Mahmoud Abbas that he will adopt a balanced policy towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Whoever succeeds George Bush in the White Bush will outperform him and will adopt a more balanced and sound approach to the Middle East. The Bush Administration was a partner in Israel's daily crimes against the Palestinians and its 2006 assault on Lebanon. Its sheer bias has solely hindered the way forward to a solution, perpetuating mutual fighting and killing.
How can we judge Barack Obama knowing that all his political stances during the electoral campaign stem from his desire to win and do not the least represent a platform to be implemented once he takes office?
Here are some information likely to convince and reassure readers. On the eve of Obama's foreign tour, I tried to find out what pro-Israelis and neocons think of the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate (he is the presumptive candidate, as the Party Conference has not yet officially chosen him). I found out that all enemies of Arabs and Muslims as well as the supporters of Israel and the occupation oppose and criticize Obama. Therefore, he must be an independent politician considered by the evil war gang as a threat to Israel's interests.
I read two articles attacking Obama in the Weekly Standard, the mouthpiece of the neocons, and two other similar articles in the National Review, another neocons mouthpiece that is Israeli more than American.
In the first magazine, one extreme right writer voices his concern over Obama's "Plan for Iraq" and for America in the world. The writer advises Obama to listen to Osama. The war gang is playing on the rhyme between Obama and Osama (bin Laden) to dissuade people from voting for a candidate called Barack Hussein Obama. The second article warned of Obama's approach to Iran and his call for "no provocation." However, the article was published as the Bush Administration decided to deal with Iran instead of boycotting it. Hence the article lost grounds.
In the National Review, I read an editorial that accused Obama of denying the successful troop surge plan in Iraq. Of course, the editorial failed to mention that terrorists moved the battle into Afghanistan where the losses incurred by the NATO are on the rise.
There was also a campaign by Charles Krauthammer, an Israeli apologist of the worst kind, who asked "Who Does Obama Think He Is?" I ask who does Krauthammer think he is but an advocate of Israel's interests to the detriment of America's? Krauthammer attacks Obama in his Washington Post articles. I do not understand how such a top liberal newspaper allows this extremist to publish his filth on its pages. In one of his articles in the newspaper, he accused Obama of being arrogant. I accuse Krauthammer of being deluded by Israel. I have nothing for him but contempt.
The war gang and the Israel lobby's attack on Obama is the best recommendation for him. The attack is truer indication of his expected orientations than any words he says in the election campaign fever. For, with his eyes on the biggest prize, Obama is likely to stumble upon some words every now and again.
|
