Jewish state is central to White House policy

The Super Tuesday primaries on February 5, 2008 formed the beginning of the end of the longest and the most costly election campaign in the history of the US. It has almost become clear that the two strongest contenders hoping to win the White House in November’s presidential election are Democrat Barack Obama and Republican front-runner John McCain. Amidst this mounting competition, the entire world, not only the Americans, is waiting for the final results of the election, which in one way or another, will affect the political and economic situations globally.

The Arab region is not immune to being affected by US politics and is in fact of strategic importance to US policy, considering that the US administration is currently embroiled in more than one problem in this region. 

Fact International interviewed a number of political experts and analysts in the Arab region to elicit their viewpoints on the US presidential election.  This was done by keeping in mind that the criteria for measuring the strongest candidate is directly associated with that candidate’s position regarding Israel, and to what extent he could influence the Arab world regarding certain issues and how much strength he could demonstrate when it came to eliminating the concepts of “terror” and “terrorist groups” from the US mindset.  

Struggle for change

Egyptian politicians stated that there has been a real desire for change inside the United States as its citizens are ready to turn away from President George Bush, who has, to a large extent, damaged the image of the US to the world.

“Over the past seven years (i.e. Bush’s tenure), the US’ image in the Arab region has been destroyed,” said Dr Abdel Men’im al-Mashat, Director of the Research and Political Studies Centre at the College of Economy and Political Sciences.

“The Republicans have negatively affected the US foreign policy as well as its internal situation, particularly in relation to real estate mortgage, the dollar price rate and the heavy financial and human losses in Iraq. Such failures encourage US voters to seek change,” Mashat told FI.

“However,” he said, “there are basic elements in the US foreign policy that will always remain constant and we should not expect any big changes, particularly when it comes to the crises in Palestine and Iraq.”

He added that there is no candidate who can alter the strategic relationship between Washington and Tel Aviv or exercise pressure on the Israeli government in favour of the Palestinian people. Even if the Democrats arrive at the White House, there will be no such change, he said.  

Director of the Centre for American Studies at the American University in Cairo, Jerry Leech, said the era of Republican hegemony on the US policy has finally come to an end.

“The candidate who comes to the White House this November will be a Democrat who will begin a new Democrat hegemony on US policy. This is not because of Bush’s declining popularity, but because of other factors relating to corruption. When an individual or a political party stays in power too long, it is likely and more easy for corruption to spread,” Leech said.

He noted that Obama differed from Hillary Clinton and John McCain with regards to Palestine. “If there is any hope pertaining to this issue, it lies with the victory of Obama. He didn’t serve in the army and he has a different perspective when it comes to agreeing to dialogue with the opposition,” he said.

“The situation has been tense inside the US ever since Obama emerged as one of the strongest candidates in the presidential race.  Should he make it to the White House, there is high expectation that attempts will be made on his life by militant groups who cannot accept having a black leader in the White House,” Leech said in remarks to FI.

“Any person who comes to the White House will make a change,” said Director of the New York Times Middle East news desk, Michael Slackman.

Obama is different from the others. He calls for dialogue with the enemy to settle thorny issues. The US did this before with former Russian leader Mikhail Gorbachev. 

Pressure groups

Political analysts in Amman said an Arab pressure group can secure a positive change in the US Middle East policy with the coming of a new president.

Former information minister Marwan Dudin said, “Whether we like it or not, the US presidential election is of great strategic importance, since the US is considered the most powerful country in the world. Because most of the power is in the hands of the president, we must realize that the election is not only important for the Americans but for the entire world as well,” he said.

“Constant and firm principles exist only in religion, but politics change according to the persons involved. Therefore it is unfair to say that US policy now is the same policy as one year ago, although Washington’s political standpoint regarding the Palestinian issue has always been biased toward Israel since 1948,” Dudin explained.

“Hence, the Arab states should devise a single united force capable of forming pressure groups, even if they can only be half as efficient as the Zionist lobby inside the US,” he said..

Political analyst Mustafa Hamarneh agrees with Dudin on the strategic importance of the US general election because the new US policy maker can change the face of the world regardless of his or her political alignment with the Jewish state.

“The Arabs should form one position, drawing on their points of economic strength, mainly their oil wealth, to pressure the US and Israel to take heed of international legislation,” Hamarneh said.

He added that although there is no significant difference between the ideologies of each of the candidates, practices on the ground proved that had there been a president other than Bush, he would have dealt with the Arabs in another way - one which would not have aggravated the crises in the region. 

Iraqi indifference

Average Iraqis do not appear to be too concerned about the results of the primaries, since they are not final. However, many believe that the fate of their country will not be affected whoever the new president is. US occupation of Iraq will continue as long as there are oil fields and other natural resources in the country, whether Bush remains in office or is replaced.

Abu Ali Mustafa, a 58-year-old sitting next to his oil stove, said “Our conditions will neither change before nor after the election. I don’t think the new president will make many changes, nor will he keep the promises made during his campaign because they were only made to gain more votes.”

Army officer Samir Naji, 28, who is responsible for an army checkpoint in Baghdad, said he does not care much about the US election process.  “We hope the winner is someone who will be to our benefit,” he told FI.

Mohammad, a shop owner aged 36, said, “The future US president will be no better than Bush. A bad one is leaving, only for someone worse to come,” he lamented. 

A tool for Israel

The Palestinians are not very interested in the US election process. They say the successive US administrations have not and will never abandon Israel and will remain an obedient tool for implementing Israel’s expansionist policy in the occupied Arab territories. This was guaranteed once again by President Bush during his recent visit to Palestine when he reaffirmed his support for the Judaisation of Isreal.

Palestinian analyst Ibrahim Abul Haija criticized leading Arab politicians who have succumbed to the US policy, which they believe is the most dominant and idealistic model. It is the only power that can alter the realities and can control everything in the Middle Eastern region.

“The US has waged most of its wars against Islam and Muslims. The presidential candidates are now competing to show who is more hostile towards terrorism, which for them means the Islamic religion. Fighting Islam and interference in the Middle East affairs forms the basis of their campaigning,” said Abul Haija.

“The Americans are now talking theoretically about the Palestinian state, even though it does not practically exist. Even if they were really to move forward to build this state, where would it be established?  On the 1967 land that has been completely colonised by the Jewish settlements?!” he asked. “The truth is that there will never be a real Palestinian state on this land at all,” he said.

“The US will not dare to take a humanitarian decision in favour of the Palestinians, so how it can it take a political decision, such as establishing a Palestinian state? The US administration will not take a decision to establish a Palestinian state unless it is sure that such a decision serves Israel’s interests first and foremost.”  

Dialogue for peace

Syrian politicians say Syria and Lebanon have become part of the US election game and the candidates are exploiting what is happening in Lebanon to drum up public and international sympathy.

Democratic candidate Barack Obama said, “Lebanon is heading toward the verge of collapse and we must not remain standing still while an emerging democratic country is in such a predicament.”

“The US should put an end to the Bush administration’s failed policy in Lebanon and replace the empty statements of this policy by involving ourselves in true and effective diplomacy. We should work with our European and Arab allies to build consensus around a new, stable and democratic Lebanon,” he said.
Obama said that if he is elected as president he would really be willing to hold direct talks with Syria and Iran to help establish peace and security in the Middle East