World craves for change as Obama sworn in

Barack Obama is sworn in as the 44th US President by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts in front of the Capitol in Washington yesterday. Photo: AFP

Stepping into history, Barack Hussein Obama was sworn in yesterday as America's first black president in a high-noon inauguration amid grave economic worries and high expectations.

Braving icy temperatures and possible snow flurries, hundreds of thousands of people descended on the heavily guarded capital city for the first change of administrations since the terror attacks of September 11, 2001.

Two years after beginning his improbable quest as a little-known, first-term Illinois senator with a foreign-sounding name, Obama moves into the Oval Office as the nation's fourth youngest president, at 47, and the first African-American, a racial barrier-breaking achievement believed impossible by generations of minorities.

Around the world, Obama's election electrified millions with the hope that America will be more embracing, more open to change.

The dawn of the new Democratic era - with Obama allies in charge of both houses of Congress - ends eight years of Republican control of the White House by George W. Bush. He leaves Washington as one of the nation's most unpopular and divisive presidents, the architect of two unfinished wars and the man in charge at a time of economic calamity that swept away many Americans' jobs, savings, homes and dreams - leaving behind a sickening feeling of insecurity.

The unfinished business of the Bush administration thrusts an enormous burden onto Obama's shoulders. Pre-inauguration polls show Americans believe Obama is on track to succeed and are confident he can turn the economy around. He has cautioned that improvements will take time and that things will get worse before they get better.

Culminating four days of celebration, the script for Obama and Vice President-elect Joe Biden at the nation's 56th inauguration was to begin with a traditional morning worship service at St. John's Episcopal Church, across Lafayette Park from the White House, and end with dancing and partying at 10 inaugural balls lasting deep into the night.

By custom, Obama and his wife, Michelle, were invited to the White House for coffee with Bush and his wife, Laura, followed by a shared ride in a sleek, heavily armoured Cadillac limousine to the US Capitol for the transfer of power, an event flashed around the world in television and radio broadcasts, podcasts and Internet streaming. On Monday, Vice President Dick Cheney pulled a muscle in his back, leaving him in a wheelchair for the inauguration.

Before noon, Obama steps forward on the West Front of the Capitol to lay his left hand on the same Bible that President Abraham Lincoln used at his first inauguration in 1861. The 35-word oath of office, administered by Chief Justice John Roberts, has been uttered by every president since George Washington. Obama was one of 22 Democratic senators to vote against Roberts' confirmation to the Supreme Court in 2005.

The son of a Kansas-born mother and Kenya-born father, Obama decided to use his full name in the swearing-in ceremony.

The Constitution says the clock - not the pomp, ceremony and oaths - signals the transfer of the office from the old president to the new one.

The 20th Amendment to the Constitution specifies that the terms of office of the president and vice president "shall end at noon on the 20th day of January ... and the terms of their successors shall then begin."

To the dismay of liberals, Obama invited conservative evangelical pastor Rick Warren - an opponent of gay rights - to give the inaugural invocation.

About a dozen members of Obama's Cabinet and top appointees - including Secretary of State-designate Hillary Rodham Clinton - were ready for Senate confirmation Tuesday, provided no objections were raised.

More than 10,000 people from all 50 states - including bands and military units - were assembled to follow Obama and Biden from the Capitol on the 1.5-mile inaugural parade route on Pennsylvania Avenue, concluding at a bulletproof reviewing stand in front of the White House. Security was unprecedented. Most bridges into Washington and about 3.5 square miles of downtown were closed.

Obama's inauguration represents a time of renewal and optimism for a nation gripped by fear and anxiety. Stark numbers tell the story of an economic debacle unrivalled since the 1930s:

-Eleven million people have lost their jobs, pushing the unemployment rate to 7.2 percent, a 16-year high.

-One in 10 US homeowners is delinquent on mortgage payments or in arrears.

-The Dow Jones industrial average fell by 33.8 percent in 2008, the worst decline since 1931, and stocks lost $10 trillion in value between October 2007 and November 2008.

Obama and congressional Democrats are working on an $825 billion economic recovery bill that would provide an enormous infusion of public spending and tax cuts. Obama also will have at his disposal the remaining $350 billion in the federal financial bailout fund. His goal is to save or create 3 million jobs and put banks back in the job of lending to customers.

In an appeal for bipartisanship, Obama honoured defeated Republican presidential rival John McCain at a dinner Monday night. "There are few Americans who understand this need for common purpose and common effort better than John McCain," Obama said.

Bon voyage, Barack Obama

THE inauguration of Barack Obama as the 44th US president was a profound and historic moment for America and the world. That an African American could become the country’s president and commander-in-chief only 43 years after the signing of the Civil Rights Act, which ended segregation, suggests that America has travelled a long way. If Obama’s election and the scenes at the inauguration on Tuesday — which was attended by some two million people, blacks and whites, women and men, old and young, Muslims and Christians — demonstrated anything, it is that the country may have finally put to rest the ghosts of slavery and segregation, of exploitation and discrimination, that have haunted it for so many years.
While people in America and around the world have reasons to rejoice at the swearing-in of the new US president, not least because it also marks the end of the tenure of George W Bush, the massive challenges that Obama will have to face from his first day at the Oval Office cannot be overstated. He will be expected to revive the US economy which is in the middle of a terrible crisis, end two long and difficult wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, find a lasting solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict, tackle international terrorism and global climate change, and fight poverty and disease in America and the rest of the world, to name but a few of his challenges.
These are challenges that the new president must face head-on. While we hope that he is able to revive the US economy, which is important from our point of view because a significant portion of our readymade garments exports go to the US, we are more interested in his ability, over the coming months and years, to chart a new course in US foreign policy. We hope that the new president will ensure that the US adheres to international laws and agreements and bases its diplomacy on respect, cooperation and multilateralism rather than on using the might of its power. In particular, we hope that the new president will not only engage diplomatically in the Middle East but will go out of his way to prove himself and his administration as an honest broker in the Arab-Israeli conflict.
We also hope the Obama administration will re-think the US ‘war on terror’ and realise that there is no military solution to the problem; the war will have to be fought on many fronts, sophistically and simultaneously. At the same time, we expect the new president to put an immediate end to torture and human rights abuses that have been carried out during the Bush administration and with its active support. In this regard, we commend him for ordering a halt to prosecution of prisoners at Guantánamo Bay as one of his first executive acts.
From Bangladesh’s point of view, it is very important that the new president tackles climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions in America as well as by helping countries like ours to adapt to the impacts of climate change. It is encouraging that Obama has promised to make energy efficiency one of the central tenets of his presidency, but it is of particular concern to us that his administration might promote bio-fuels as an alternative energy option, which would drive up the price of food and threaten our food security. Instead, we hope that his administration sets strict energy efficiency standards at home and invest money on research to find efficient ways to use renewable energy such as wind and solar.
There are many challenges in front of the new president, but none of the challenges will be insurmountable if Obama and his administration take an open, transparent and inclusive approach to solving the problems. We wish him and his administration the best.

Obama starts job after historic inauguration

Barack Obama Wednesday started the job of hauling his crisis-weary nation out of its ‘winter of hardship’ by taking action to halt Guantanamo trials and convening top economic and foreign policy aides.
His first move came in the form of an order to prosecutors at the controversial military tribunals in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, seeking a suspension of the trial proceedings.
Military judges were expected to rule later Wednesday on the request, which would halt until May the military trials of five alleged plotters of the September 11, 2001 attacks as well as a Canadian held on accusations of killing a US soldier in Afghanistan.
A day after Obama’s historic inauguration as the first black US president, key White House staff members were also set to pour into the presidential mansion, with the weight of financial and foreign policy threats suddenly resting on their shoulders.
Obama was due to spend the first part of his day seeking divine blessing for his presidency at a traditional prayer service at Washington’s National Cathedral.
Then he was expected to call in his top economic lieutenants to start the task of repairing the ruptured US economy and shepherd a huge 825-billion-dollar stimulus package through the US Congress.
In a sign of the tough task ahead, the Dow Jones Industrials Average plummeted four per cent on Obama’s first day in office Tuesday as investors were spooked by deep problems in the banking industry.
Obama was also expected to meet his top military leaders to fulfil a campaign promise — telling the generals to formulate a plan to get US troops out of Iraq, and reorienting military efforts towards the war in Afghanistan.
On Tuesday, Obama claimed his place in history as leader of a nation stained by the legacies of slavery and racial segregation, and told Americans they have to pull together to pick their way out of raging storms.
‘We have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord,’ Obama, 47, said in a sombre inaugural address to a stunning two million-strong crowd which took sharp issue with the two-term Republican presidency of George W Bush.
‘Today I say to you that the challenges we face are real, they are serious and they are many.
‘They will not be met easily, or in a short span of time. But know this, America — they will be met.’
The former Illinois senator took office amidst the worst economic crisis since the 1930s, with tens of thousands of US troops locked in Iraq and Afghanistan and a nuclear showdown with Iran looming.
Obama’s inauguration on the steps of the US Capitol, which was partially built with slave labour, broke the highest racial barrier in the United States and goes some way to reconciling civil rights leader Martin Luther King’s dream of racial unity.
Obama vowed to reclaim America’s place at the head of global powers, and signalled he would reject anti-terror tactics used by the Bush administration which critics say infringe US values.
‘We reject as false, the choice between our safety and our ideals,’ he said.
‘We are ready to lead once more.’
Several estimates put the crowd on the National Mall at more than two million, and many in the throng wept as the new president spoke.
Obama also sent an immediate message to the rest of the world, and Islamic nations in particular, after America’s ties with some of its top allies were tarnished during the Bush years, especially over the Iraq war.
‘To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect.’
But he also warned that those who would use ‘terror’ and slaughter innocents to threaten the United States would face an uncompromising response.
‘Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred. We say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.’
He called on Americans to launch a ‘new era of responsibility’ as the economy sinks deep into recession, brought on by massive stocks of bad mortgages and debt.
He pledged that the United States would join other nations in rolling back ‘the spectre of a warming planet.’
London-based human rights watchdog Amnesty International welcomed Obama’s move on Guantanamo but said all charges against detainees should be dropped and those held at the camp should be tried within the US federal justice system.
It said the move was ‘a step in the right direction, but must be promptly cemented into a permanent abandonment of these unfair proceedings.’

Burden of hope

WITH Barack Obama’s inauguration on Tuesday, arguably the most ignominious chapter in the US presidency has, thankfully, come to an end. After eight years of George W Bush at the White House — a period that has been symbolised by brazen violations of the US constitution and a mockery of the rule of law at home and internationally, not to mention that it was one of the most reticent, inflexible and doctrinaire administrations in many years — change has indeed come to Washington. But the new president inherits the Oval Office at the most challenging of times. When Barack Obama started his campaign for the highest office in the early days of 2007, America was already in the midst of two difficult wars. By the time he was elected president in November 2008, the US economy had completely tanked as well, bringing with it record unemployment. Between his election and his inauguration, Israel unleashed the most brutal massacre on the people of Gaza, not only cancelling but reversing any progress that had been made in the past decade and a half in finding a final and acceptable solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict. It goes without saying that this new president will not be able to enjoy a honeymoon period; he has not been afforded one. The Obama administration will have to start handling, from day one, multiple crises at the same time. It will be a daunting challenge, but it also offers the new president an amazing opportunity to lead his country and the world in a radically different direction.
Even with all that is going on around the world, Obama’s first priority will have to be to revive the US economy. The people voted for him in the midst of great economic uncertainty because they felt that he was the best person to lead America out of its current economic and financial crisis. In the short-term, the Obama administration will have to figure out the best way to spend the remaining half of the $700 billion bailout package which was approved by congress at the end of last year. In addition, the administration will have to figure out an effective stimulus package, which may be worth close to a trillion dollars and include a significant middle-class tax break, to jumpstart the economy. The new president has put together an impressive economic team to help him through this tricky period, as he first tries to prevent the bottom from falling through altogether and then tries to build the economy back up.
President Obama, in the medium-term, will have to find ways to create hundreds of thousands of new jobs. On the campaign trail, Obama had talked up his plan to spend $150 billion over the next ten years on alternative energy to reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil, and had said that his plan would create millions of new, ‘green’ jobs. Whether he will still be able to find the money to do that, given the reality following the economic collapse, is yet unclear. However, since the energy issue was a top priority for Obama during the campaign, chances are that his administration will put particular emphasis on finding the money to invest in this sector. The Obama administration is also likely to invest heavily on infrastructure, rebuilding America’s ageing roads and bridges, as a way to put large numbers of people back to work. Ultimately, however, the Obama administration will have to find ways to improve the competitiveness of the American workforce to slow down the surge of American jobs being sent overseas. There is little hope of reversing that trend in the short to medium-term, but this may be possible, to an extent, in the long-term.
On the home front, Obama’s other challenge will be to deliver on universal health insurance in America. Bill Clinton had won the presidency in 1992 on the back of his promise to provide universal health insurance, only for his attempt to fail so spectacularly that it almost doomed his presidency. The Obama administration will have to heed the lessons of that failed attempt, and equally importantly, will have to build a bipartisan coalition in congress to pass new legislation to ensure healthcare for all Americans. Once again, whether he will have the money to do this in the near-term is uncertain, but the Obama presidency provides a real chance for America to finally have universal health insurance.
If the new president’s domestic problems are challenging, his problems overseas are worse. Much of the gains made by American troops in Afghanistan in the early days of the ill-advised ‘war on terror’, when they managed to remove the Taliban government and put in place the US-friendly regime of Hamid Karzai, have been lost in the intervening years, thanks to the shift in focus to Iraq. Taliban are now in the ascendancy in Afghanistan and control vast areas of land which had been freed from their control. At the same time, there has been little progress towards a political solution in Iraq, even though the US-led ‘surge’ did lead to a decrease in violence in the country. Obama, who was against the US-led invasion of Iraq from the very beginning, had promised during the campaign to take all US forces out of the country within 16 months of his entering the White House. But given the fragile security situation in the country, whether he will be able to stick to the time-frame and avoid letting the country descend into complete chaos is anyone’s guess.
Regardless of what his military top-brass advises him to do, Obama ought to go with his first instinct and draw down troop levels in Iraq quickly and responsibly. After all, for as long as Iraq remains under US occupation, the chances of a political solution are extremely slim. In Afghanistan, Obama’s plan includes sending additional brigades to push back Taliban once again from areas where they have regained control. That may work as a short-term strategy, just as the ‘surge’ appeared to work in Iraq, but will not provide a long-term solution. For that, the United States under Obama needs to provide significant development assistance to Afghanistan over a period of years to rebuild the country and its economy so that the people of the country themselves build a resistance towards obscurantist forces like Taliban which only want to take the country back to the Middle Ages.
Whether in Iraq or in Afghanistan, one hopes that the Obama administration will realise that there is no military solution to the problems. That is what the Bush administration never tried to understand, and that is what got the United States into the messes that it is in. Obama as commander-in-chief will have to take a new approach to the problems of Afghanistan and Iraq, and by extension, will have to take a new approach to fighting international terrorism altogether. It will have to realise that the best way to do so is to do it together with the international community, in keeping with national and international laws, and by showing the strictest adherence to the rule of law and commitment to human rights. Shutting down the detention camp in Guantánamo Bay in Cuba immediately and stopping altogether all forms of torture of ‘enemy combatants’ will not only be a good start but would demonstrate to the international community that Obama’s America will be vastly different from Bush’s America.
President Obama will also be expected to delve right into the Arab-Israeli conflict to try to do what so many of his predecessors have failed to do: find a permanent solution acceptable to both sides the Palestinians and the Israelis. President Bush was the first American president to openly advocate a two-state solution, which appeared to be a major step forward at first, but did nothing during his eight years in office to make it a reality. Instead, the Bush administration provided near blanket support to Israel all throughout, which gave Israel the confidence to carry out the brutal and systematic massacre of Gaza that it had done in the last few weeks. If Obama is to have any hope of succeeding where so many US presidents have failed, he will have to begin by proving that he is an honest broker, unlike his immediate predecessor. If he can do that, there is a possibility that he will be able to restore peace in the short-term and move towards a more permanent settlement in the long-term. There are rumours that the Obama administration will appoint former senator George Mitchell as Middle East envoy to negotiate between the Palestinians and the Israelis. If true, this will immediately signify that the Obama administration is willing to engage with the parties at a far deeper level than the Bush administration was ever ready to do. This will be a step in the right direction, and the choice of Mitchell — who had significant success in brokering a peace deal in Northern Ireland and also worked on the Arab-Israeli conflict under President Clinton — suggests that Obama is serious about finding a lasting solution, rather than providing mere lip service to a two-state strategy.
So great are the new president’s immediate challenges that it is difficult to see how he will give attention to so many of the other major problems that he will face in the Oval Office. This president will not only be expected to revive a failing economy and end wars, he will also be expected to slow down climate change, keep America safe from terrorism, provide health insurance, improve education standards, and deal with a myriad problems from energy to immigration to crime. He will have to challenge America to reach new heights, while at the same time managing expectations from his administration. Barack Obama is now in a position of great privilege, but he also has the most unenviable of jobs. One this is for sure though, given the immediate challenges that he faces, how he handles his first few months in the Oval Office is almost certain to make or break his presidency.

Obama makes history: America votes for change

FOR the first time in history, an African-American won the White House. This indeed is historic. To my mind it is not so much historic because Obama is an American citizen by birth, struggled to get good professional education, ran for public service position to become a Senator, and has every right to contest and win the highest executive post on merit. Why should his ancestry (in a land of immigrants) and the colour of his skin make his achievement historical? Is that not based on the assumption that a non-white is less of a citizen and has fewer rights?
What, however, is historic is the dawn of change in the political process in America that Obama’s victory ushers. To be more specific, the return of faith in American dream of equal opportunities, the breaking of the sound barrier of race and colour that effectively denied equal rights to minorities and blacks in particular, the triumph of reason and rationale over blind prejudice, and above all the groundswell of enthusiasm and energy of millions of young and educated voters made the history. Never before these 2008 elections did so many rallied behind a call for change, seldom did so many volunteer so much effort and energy in election campaign. The youth invested in hope and yearned for change in the political landscape, and give a new start. Those are the things that made history. The long, hard contest between the Republicans and Democrats is history already past. The time to rejoice is over; the future is waiting to happen. History 20 or 30 years from now will tell how well and how much history was made by this unprecedented and enormous victory.
Now that victory is in hand, the real task has just begun. As the president-elect told the climb will be steep, time will be needed. Those millions who invested so much in hope and faith to change America such that it is fairer, kinder, more just and humane at home and abroad have to remain engaged in a long, hard struggle; even those who lost the contest have an obligation to participate as well as a right to be listened to with respect.
Barack Obama, young as he is, did show remarkable maturity in his victory night address to more than 200,000 supporters at Chicago. He spoke with now-familiar eloquence that inspired but also tempered his speech with sober reminder of the enormity of the task ahead; did not fail to extend a hand of accommodation and sought cooperation of his ‘opponents’. Thus, the signs are good; hope is alight.
Barack Obama has already spelt out some of his future agenda as president. These include domestic policies on economy and jobs, on taxes and spending, on education and employment. The legacy left by the outgoing administration is riddled with dire dilemmas of which the current economic meltdown is the foremost priority. All assessments point to the inevitability of deep structural changes in economy and finance so hard to bring about given the past decades of laissez faire and blanket de-regulation. Obama faces an unenviable yet unavoidable task to be accomplished against stubborn entrenched interests of neo-liberal economists. He will need the determination and grit he could possibly command. He will also need the consent and cooperation of the Congress to help passage of legislation he proposes. He could have done well with a two-thirds majority in the senate which did not come about.
American public have not been much concerned about deeper domestic policy issues other than those that affect them directly. That is why the public dislike taxes while their representatives vote to support war abroad to commit huge tax revenues in war effort. Iraq and Afghanistan are two inglorious, if not notorious, examples. There could be more as long as the US president and the Congress choose to conduct foreign policy based upon an exaggerated and unilateral notion of national security. The Bush doctrine of pre-emption and ‘war on terror’ has been two dangerous adventures.
Indeed Obama had opposed war on Iraq. Now as incumbent he has to steer his way through a withdrawal with ‘responsibility’. Commitment in haste does not allow disentanglement in haste as well. So much blood has spilt, treasures spent with so little to show for it.
While pledged to withdraw from Iraq, he has committed himself to send more troops to the Afghan theatre. How well that would play out is open to question. His NATO allies are not ready to commit combat troops.
The hardest choice with potential of widening the conflict is his stated wish to conduct military operations inside Pakistan territory. The implications are not all predictable. But certainly yet another war front is fraught with danger.
Saving money in Iraq and spending in Afghanistan and extend war on Pakistan might not prove a good military or economic option. There has to be another way. Recent past shows enough evidence to suggest it is easy to launch war but difficult to either win quickly or withdraw by choice.
Observers would know the US foreign policy has been consistent across the Republican and Democratic Party lines. As long as ‘national interests and national security’ are perceived as supreme needs and unilaterally secured, if necessary, the US would be obliged to put ‘all options on the table’ including an intimidating military option to browbeat the non-compliers. How well that would continue to work and at what cost are things the new president might do well to ponder and act upon. Would Obama command the ingenuity to forge a new policy, one tempered by alternatives that could make him appear to be a weak commander-in-chief something he has been repeatedly accused of?
The good thing is: Obama did commit himself to opening dialogue with adversaries without preconditions. That would go well with Iran and Syria. One hopes he can carry through this approach without giving in to the domestic pressures to the contrary.
Elections rhetoric is one thing. Obama’s open-ended commitment and his support to Jerusalem as the eternal capital of Israel did not raise the level of confidence in the Arab world. How he will accomplish peace in the Middle East remains an open challenge. I am not even mentioning other hotspots like Iran, like Russia asserting its lost role as a superpower.
Foreign policy issues are formidable enough. Assumptions by his predecessor proved wrong and dangerous. He has to chart changes and invent new yet uncertain or untested approaches.
While the domestic economy plunges into recession it might spare him less time and resources to engage vigorously in foreign policy issues. Yet the legacy he inherits permits him the leisure or luxury to do so.
Now that Obama has raised so much hope and inspired so many within America and abroad he has to deliver, at least a few things. He could make history by charting a course that corrects the deep economic anomalies and restores leadership with responsibility. Reforms within must precede the call for cooperation from other emerging global economies.
If he could deliver reforms at home, if he could restore the image of his country in the international community as a credible, responsible power with benign posture in relation to the weaker ones he will be making history. In doing that he would change the political process and culture of the US for not just now but for decades ahead.
The US still is the leader with potential to do great things at home and abroad. The US need not earn that leadership by show of force but by setting examples of its moral values and an abiding faith in justice and fairer international order.
Would Obama at the end of his first or second term in office leave that kind of legacy? We do not know. Elections anywhere raise high hopes. This one did inspire many and elevated hoes at home and abroad. If even a part of those are realised Barack Obama would have made what is truly historic, not by his ancestry or colour of skin but by making a contribution that changed the course of America and thereby rest of the world. Many of those who did not support his election would not grudge his success. Those who rallied to make him win would keep their hopes alive.

Change we need, change we may not get

BARACK Obama’s election as the American president is perceived as a victory on many fronts. Not to mention that he is the first African-American president, Obama almost embodies the American dream. Born of a Kenyan immigrant father and a white American mother, Obama has grown up poor. His resounding victory leaves little doubt that the American people have indeed voted for change. This change is not merely limited to choosing Democrats over Liberals or a younger candidate over an older one. Obama’s victory heralds a new chapter; it breaks away from long-held traditions which had been considered almost impossible.
The president-elect has on several times stated that he wants to spread the wealth around, and asserted his belief that the state should play a larger role in education and health. His campaign pledges indicate that he would raise taxes of corporations and big businesses, and use the revenue for rebates to middle-income families and public services that would largely benefit the middle classes.
His economic plan includes expenditure of $50 billion to jumpstart the US economy and protection of one million jobs. Obama has also pledged to introduce a windfall profit tax on oil company revenues to pay for rebates for the working families. Given the rising costs, he intends to provide up to a $1,000 in rebates for every American family. Obama also proposes disincentives for companies that outsource jobs and incentives for those that create employment in the United States.
Obama proposes an expenditure of $150 billion over ten years for a greener economy by encouraging production of hybrid cars that will run on electricity to save fossil fuel consumption and overcome American dependence on West Asia or Venezuela for energy security. As part of his plan to ensure energy security, Obama will continue to pursue promotion of biofuel production, which is already heavily subsidised.
Obama has pledged to ‘review’ the North American Free Trade Agreement and amend it such manner that it helps American workers. On the trade front, the president-elect ‘will fight for a trade policy that opens up foreign markets to support good American jobs.’ Obama intends to use trade agreements to spread good labour and environmental standards around the world and stand firm against agreements like the Central American Free Trade Agreement that fail to live up to those important benchmarks. They will also pressure the World Trade Organisation to enforce trade agreements and stop countries from continuing unfair government subsidies to foreign exporters and non-tariff barriers on US exports.
The American middle class and the working people can indeed expect positive changes in their lives and livelihoods. Obama’s plan to increase state spending in education and health will presumably also help reduce poverty and, more importantly, the rising disparity and hunger in the US. He has pledged to protect American jobs and industries with state spending and subsidies. That is all very good for the American people.
For the rest of the world, however, this change of American presidency would bring about few noticeable changes in terms of foreign policy. As far as trade is concerned, which is perhaps one of the major concerns for Bangladesh, Obama has already indicated his protectionist attitude. It would mean that Bangladeshi apparel manufacturers would continue to face high, if not even higher, tariffs if it helps protect the industries and jobs in the US.
When it comes to trade agreements, Obama will aggressively pursue such policies that generate employment in the US. He ‘will use these agreements to open up markets abroad and reduce subsidies in other countries and do away with non-tariff barriers applied to American goods.’ It means that, while he would adopt more protectionism for the US economy, his government would be aggressively looking towards liberalising the trade regime of other countries.
It also means that, while the US applies tariffs to the Bangladeshi apparels and firmly rejects the possibility of reducing them, the Obama administration would seek to tear down protectionist barriers in Bangladesh, or any other country, that prevent entry of American goods and services to protect jobs and industries. His position regarding trade agreements also hints at moving away from the accepted ‘less than full reciprocity’ between poor countries and developed countries in trade negotiations to reciprocal concessions.
Bangladeshi manufacturers as well as the establishment have pinned their hopes on the New Partnership for Development Act that includes provisions for the much-sought duty-free market access to the US market. There was already strong opposition within the US, as well as the African lobby, against Bangladesh receiving such concessions. Under Obama, those concessions would become even more difficult to secure.
In fact, in response to a questionnaire of National Council of Textile Organisations, dated October 24, the president-elect pledged to support almost all the points that the textile council advocated. This same council has thus far, even as recently as on September 25, opposed the idea of duty-free access for Bangladeshi products to the US market. They point out that the textile industry is among the largest sectors in the US employing some 700,000 people.
There is little indication that America’s agricultural policies or the targets set out by its energy bill will be altered by the Obama administration. Obama’s energy plan clearly states that his administration would continue to encourage biofuel production and, given his protectionist attitude about creating more jobs in the US, it is unlikely that it would shift from corn-based ethanol, no matter how inefficient it is in terms carbon emission. The US under Obama would remain firmly on course to meet its target of producing 10 per cent automobile fuel from ethanol.
It has been argued repeatedly by most of the international research organisations and institutions that biofuel production has had significant impact on food crisis. Obama’s administration, together with a similar European target, would contribute to further aggravate the global food crisis. His policies would still pit empty fuel tanks against empty stomachs and American subsidies for biofuel production—about $7 billion in 2007—would make that even more unequal and unjust.
Obama’s presidency is unlikely to bring about changes in its institutions or other international agencies and their policies. If anything, these institutions and agencies would become even more active in imposing conditions on poor countries to liberalise their economies and reduce their subsidies since they do not make economic sense and encourage inefficiency. The same conditions, however, would not apply for the US where billions would be spent to shore up manufacturing sectors. Subsidies and incentives will be handed out to ensure that companies do not outsource their jobs and continue to employ Americans, no matter how inefficient or how much more costly they may be. It is unlikely that other developing countries would be allowed to do the same though.
Thus, aid agencies of the American establishment will continue to pursue projects that eventually end up ensuring increased business and opportunity for American consultants and companies. The multinational corporations that control American policies will continue to dominate and exert influence fulfilling their own interest through US role across the world. For instance, the top contributors to Obama’s campaign include Microsoft Corporation, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Citigroup and UBS, according to the Centre for Responsive Politics, a research group tracking money in US politics. Microsoft has driven the US agenda to implement intellectual property rights, while UBS, a leading financial firm in the world has interests in Asia Energy, which proposes to set up an open-pit coalmine in Phulbari.
In all likelihood, the Obama administration government will succeed in making the life of an average American better. But outside its borders, US policies will hardly change. Except that in Obama, quite like George W Bush’s immediate predecessor, and very much unlike Bush himself, there will be a good orator who successfully created a façade but furthered American imperialist interests all the same.

America makes a new tryst with destiny

THE magic word ‘change’ and the magic number ‘270’ have both finally clicked. Change with a capital C. Wednesday’s mid-morning news bulletin announced that Barack Obama’s electoral college votes had crossed the winning figure of 270 while votes of some states were yet to be counted. What was more, he had upset predictions for some traditional Republican bastions. After eight years, 3 trillion dollars in war expenditure, economic meltdown, demonstrable futility of the policy of countering terror with terror and nearly four thousand American body bags, the voters have taken the right decision. Common Americans, like the common people everywhere, do not want war, although they can be faulted for their unthinking consumerism and uncaring attitude towards the wide world as long as cheap oil (‘gas’, as they call it) and cheap food are ensured. This time they have learnt that you have to fight for these things also.
This was not a closely fought presidential contest as in 1960 and 2000. As the election was approaching the result was becoming more and more predictable. But predictability did not take away from its excitement. Some US presidential elections and election campaigns were more interesting than others. This year too the contest was more exhilarating than a mere leap year event like the Olympic Games. The record turnout in this election shows that common Americans are not as apolitical as generally thought. An important reason for the high turnout may be that a higher proportion of African-Americans voted than usual. There was a time when they were too afraid to go to the polling booth. And the youth were less indifferent this time. Muslims may also have participated in greater numbers. A call was made from mosques upon the Muslims to exercise their voting right, without promoting any individual candidate. Hispanic Americans too were traditionally less enthusiastic about voting. Immigration, a hot topic among Muslims and Hispanics, is very much on the agenda of Barack Obama, the son of an immigrant.
Anything unconventional easily draws attention and in this unconventionality is packed global political and economic implications which are almost impossible to entirely foresee and gauge. We can leave aside the comic element introduced in this highly serious affair in the person of Sarah Palin, who came in suddenly from nowhere and seemed not to know a thing or two about politics and election and America and instead lent some hilarity to the tense atmosphere. It is unfortunate that the first female vice-presidential nominee in US history should prove herself to be a bull in a china shop.
It can be argued, of course, that it is vain to be too effusive about Barack Obama because, after all, from the point of view of the policy on arms race, the Middle East and oil interests the difference between Democrat and Republican candidates in all elections has been just as much as between Tweedledee and Tweedledum. Will it be different this time? No one should forget that here is a president who has promised the Zionists that undivided Jerusalem shall be the capital of Israel. Then is it justifiable to hope for a new turn? True, but sometimes the style not only matters but even makes an impact on the substance. And the political process can somewhat chasten politics itself. In foreign relations Obama’s emphasis has all along been on engagement and dialogue, words which were an anathema to George W Bush who was continuously threatening that he had ‘all options on the table’ (including military strike against non-complying states).
The election was mainly fought on economic platform at the time of meltdown. Honesty and candour in a different situation would have created sympathy for a candidate but at this time of meltdown it did not help McCain to confess that he is not knowledgeable about economics. And Obama is known as the most left-wing senator. High taxes and high public spending can be a viable option now. This may bring Obama in conflict with corporate interest. Record amount of money has been spent by both sides in this election. (Around $2.5 billion in total). Those who donated large amounts have axes to grind. McCain too is a Republican without being a neocon and he too would perhaps not toe the neocon line but then on economic matters he is a self-confessed ignoramus. Besides, the anti-incumbency factor acts even more strongly in times of economic downturn. Some have seen this election as a referendum against Bush-Cheney rule. Fortunately for Obama, the election took place at a time when George Bush’s popularity rating had sunk abnormally low (26 per cent).
Race and religion are still live electoral issues in the world’s strongest and second largest democracy. Forty-six years ago the Catholic John Kennedy had to face the religious question just because before him all presidents had been WASP (White, Anglo-Saxon Protestant). That rigidity has been broken. The new president has part Muslim genealogy. Not that the racial question was entirely muted. According to a recent survey conducted by Stanford University, Associated Press and Yahoo as cited by the Indian columnist MJ Akbar, some 10 per cent Americans are irredeemably racist and another 6 per cent are unconsciously so. Some dirty racial tricks were also played to stoke up prejudice. (In Pennsylvania, a ‘swing’ state, they planted a young white woman who alleged that she had been molested by a tall and muscular black man who also branded her face for opposing Obama. Her story was even televised before a further scrutiny was able to call the bluff and she herself acknowledged having been planted. As election prank the drama could have been amusing but for the fact that it is deeply racist in form, content and flavour).
There is no disputing that racism persists but there is another way of looking at things. The fact that surmounting all the odds an African-American is entering the White House is itself not only a positive change but one with revolutionary import. The glass of race relations is not only half-empty, it is also half-filled. The American media, which made itself contemptible by its servility to the establishment and acquiring the epithet ‘embedded’, played a commendable role in this case by not letting the race issue surface. Not only will the global media see a new face, everyone hopes the new face will be less arrogant. No one can question that the USA is, still, the world’s most powerful state, but powerful entities are not necessarily arrogant which unfortunately and unnecessarily George W Bush made his country appear.
During the campaign both the candidates said they would include persons from the opposition in the government. Is it an attempt towards national unity in a time of financial crisis? Massive challenges await the new president. He opposed the Iraq war, opposed the surge in troops and has pledged to end the war. To oppose the war before it had begun was easy; to disentangle his country keeping its interest intact and bequeathing peace to the Iraqi people is not easy. He will reduce taxes for the poor, give more attention to healthcare, bring drastic changes in education and limit dependence on energy. Also, he will resolve the immigration issue.
It will be wrong to find significance of the change by contrasting the new programmes only with the eight inglorious Bush years. If we look further behind, fifty or sixty years, it will be clear that a sea change has come about. Racism persists but is denied any public space. A presidential candidate was branded a socialist by opponents and yet he sweeps the polls, non-whites, immigrants and the poor feel empowered. All this could be accomplished through a slow and democratic political process. The world can still be made a better place. What Obama will achieve remains in the womb of the future but for the present this election has brought considerable prestige for the US. By prioritising education the Harvard trained Obama addresses a growing deficiency in the quality of American leadership. George Bush’s ignorance was proverbial, his father’s running mate vice-president Dan Quale caused a storm through America by failing to correctly spell the word ‘potato’, the other day Sarah Palin could not name a single American newspaper. Hope Obama can successfully play his part as an early agent of this change.