Obama - Indonesian point

Misconceptions about presidential candidate Obama

http://www.thejakartapost.com/detailheadlines.asp?fileid=20080221.B08&irec=7

Bara Hasibuan, Jakarta

The exhilaration over Barack Obama's recent surge to claim the front-runner status in the Democratic Party nomination process is not just felt in the United States but also here in Indonesia.

Never before has there ever been a candidate in the history of the U.S. presidential elections with such strong historical ties to this country.

Many here are hopeful that an Obama presidency would usher in a new era in the U.S.-Indonesia bilateral relations. But would it?

First of all the notion that just because a candidate lived in a foreign country for a few years during childhood might somehow mean she or he would focus extra attention to that particular country if elected president is somewhat fanciful. Foreign policy is not driven by romanticism but by priorities and strategic interests.

It is not clear at this point how strategic Indonesia is for Obama -- or for any other candidate for that matter -- as the country has never been brought up throughout the campaign, whether in debates or stump speeches.

In the most comprehensive foreign policy speech Obama made last year in Chicago, Indonesia was hardly mentioned. Obama's foreign policy plan, as laid out on his campaign website, only calls for "new partnerships in Asia", without specifically identifying which countries in Asia with which he would seek new partnerships.

The only serious reference Obama has ever made to Indonesia has been in the context of his childhood living in a country with a Muslim majority which would make him the best candidate in dealing with one of the most pressing challenges the next President would face: repairing the U.S. image in the Muslim world.

But as he was once unduly attacked by a smear campaign charging that he had attended a Madrasah while living in Indonesia, Obama has been forced not to overtly stress his historical ties to the country.

And if we look at Obama's record in the U.S. Senate, it is equally hard to assess how he views Indonesia. Obama does in fact sit on the Foreign Relations Subcommittee on East Asian and Pacific Affairs but he has never shown notable interest on Indonesian issues.

Yes true on Capitol Hill when it comes to priorities related to Asia, Indonesia is of less importance compared to China, Afghanistan, Japan, India and North Korea.

But there are a handful of senators and congressmen known to take up Indonesian issues from time to time, whether in a critical or a supportive way.

Just to name a few: Senators Patrick Leahy, Kit Bond, Russ Feingold and Congressmen Robert Wexler and Eni Faleomavaega.

It is not clear why Obama has never used his assignment on the Foreign Relations Subcommittee on East Asian and Pacific Affairs to take up Indonesian issues.

One would think with such strong historical ties Obama would position himself as an ally of Indonesia.

It is conceivable that early on in his Senate career he had made a strategic decision not to get associated with Indonesia as he was already thinking ahead of a possible presidential bid. Or perhaps for Obama Indonesia simply has a less strategic value compared to other foreign policy priorities.

Indeed, whoever ends up in the White House in January 2009 foreign policy priorities for the U.S. will not change dramatically.

The new president will still have to deal with the mess in Iraq, how to get the Israelis and the Palestinians to agree to a workable peaceful solution, uncertainty about Iran's nuclear programs, the rise of Russia as an economic and military power and energy security.

For Asia the priorities will still be dominated by the rise of China, the North Korea nuclear programs, the uncertainty in Pakistan, the mess in Afghanistan and India's economic rise.

And whoever is elected President, he or she will continue to maintain strong ties with U.S. traditional allies in Asia Pacific: Japan, South Korea and Australia.

Another factor that needs to be put into the equation is Congress -- a body that has a lot of influence in shaping U.S. foreign policy through the power of the purse.

The Democrats are expected to continue to control Congress after the 2008 elections. That means issues like human rights, the role of the military and labor that have often times been contentious in the U.S.-Indonesia bilateral relations may not go away.

True one of the main attractions to Obama is that as President he would have the ability to mobilize support from Congress, including from those who are across the aisle.

But it remains unclear whether Obama would have the ability or the power to sway members of his own party on issues that are traditionally close to their hearts.

And we also need to bear in mind that despite all the talk about bipartisanship and reaching across the aisle Obama is ideologically liberal.

He in fact was voted the most liberal senator in 2007 by the publication, National Journal. This may make it instinctively hard for him to disregard issues like human rights and labor.

Nevertheless, the prospect of an Obama presidency is thrilling. There is no doubt of all the candidates who remain in the race, he is the best one to restore the U.S. global image.

His assets are obvious: The face and the background. And these assets would be the most powerful weapons to meet one of the biggest challenges for the next administration: How to win the hearts and minds of those who have been alienated by the Bush Administration.

The writer was an American Political Science Association (APSA) congressional fellow 2002-2003.

Kosovo - Problems for US

Kosovo Independence Equals Problems for U.S.

THE EVIL MEDIA

While driving today, I have listened to every news media today. Our Embassy was torched in Kosovo today by the radicals, not one media said the name of the faith of the people who did the wrong, and indeed, that is truly the right thing to do. (http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2007/05/laser-barking-at-terrorists.html )

If those radicals were Muslims, imagine the feasting that would have gone on by the vultures like O'Reilly, Hannity, Beck, and Savage. This is the ultimate in evilness of our media. Shame on them. I hope the people of conscience open a blog of their own, each individual and put this out as many times as they can. Media is blatantly evil. I hope each one of you can call on their talk show tomorrow, and encourage them to do the right thing for every incident, bad guys are bad guys, do not stamp them with a religion.

http://www.newsmax.com/alden/kosovo/2008/02/21/74508.html Thursday, February 21, 2008 3:27 PM

By: Diane Alden Article Font Size

The current disaster in Serbia, including the attack on the U.S. embassy in Belgrade was predictable. That is, if you know the history of the region, our involvement under Bill Clinton and now George W. Bush, and the U.S. State Department’s craziness about how to create "democracy" and markets in the 21st century.

The Gerard Intelligence Report indicated Monday that Serbia was about to blowup in our faces. You didn’t hear a word about it in the mainstream media. It was barely mentioned as Bush stood signing the paper that gave our stamp of approval to Kosovo "independence."


The rush to do this may have a lot to do with resource issues as much as encouraging democracy to take root — which hasn’t been happening under Clinton or Bush.

Gerard Report advises its clients:

Muslims who represent 90 percent of Kosovo's two million people, have stated their claim on the new state. According to our source, a systematic ethnic cleansing of Kosovo's remaining Christian inhabitants has been going on for several years and will now likely escalate.

Since we have been supporting democracy in Kosovo, and have ignored the strong Albanian Islamic influence in political affairs there, we have opened the gates to a new Islamic state, complete with terrorist training camps on the ground and a global network through which to funnel their graduates.

This begins a trail that leads to (but does not end in) New York City, where the Albanian Mafia has taken over much of the drug and organized crime trade. The combination of the legitimization of their terrorist activities in Kosovo, their links to the U.S., and the fall of Serbia (partly self-inflicted) may spell a new era of unrest and confusion that will mean danger for U.S. interests everywhere.



The breakup of the former Yugoslavia in the late '80s and '90s took place partially because the only thing holding it together was dictator Tito and Russian troops. Part of the reason for the breakup was economic. Insane actions of U.S. and international monetary experts as well as financial gurus at the International Monetary Fund and World Trade Organization facilitated the collapse of the former Yugoslavia into tiny sectors of ethnic and religious bickering and hatreds that are now causing U.S. problems.

Following World War II, industrial development took place in northern Yugoslavia, while the southern half of country produced raw materials. As the price of raw materials fell, serious economic inequalities between the various states grew. This in turn led to discontent and a desire for independence in the industrial north.

The International Monetary Fund then took over economic policy, implementing a number of all too familiar shock therapies; devaluation, a wage freeze, and price decontrol, designed on the Harvard/MIT economic textbook principles meant to drive the wage rate down to a level where it would be internationally economically competitive."

But the interference of the IMF caused revenues to the central government to shrink and that in turn forced the IMF to insist on raising taxes in Yugoslavia in order to balance the budget.

As the Cold War was ending in the late '80s, the Federal Republic began to splinter. At the same time, servicing the national debt became hopeless.

As a result, the attempt to comply with IMF demands made a shaky economic situation even worse.

Between 1979 and 1985 a quarter of the national income was taken up with debt service. As a result, the economy began to implode and ethnic conflicts erupted. Thus, the current conflict in the Balkans may be partly explained by economic factors as much as by ethnic hatreds and rivalries.


All this should be some indication our experts do not know what they are doing. Neither do our political leaders, it appears, in the modern world of splintering into religious, tribal, and ethnic groupings.

In the '90s, the breakup of the various ethnic and religious provinces accelerated when Europeans, the international press, and State Department whiz kids saw ethnic cleansing only on one side blaming Christian Serbs and ignoring atrocities by the other side. Some believe interference by the Clinton administration was just an attempt to get his troubles off the front page. That intervention for whatever reason had unintended consequences and now America is seeing some of the blowback.

During Bill Clinton's era of screwing things up in the Balkans, his end runaround congress on the conduct of that war is something I vividly remember. The Clinton administration had a contract with U.S. mercenaries to go to Bosnia. At an estimated $50 million the objective was to integrate and build up the Bosnia army of Muslims and Croats against the Serbs. The U.S. State Department’s incompetence and flaky policies in the region gave the go ahead for religious cleansing of Christian Serbs to accommodate Muslims in the former Yugoslavia.


Along with the DoD under Richard Cohen and the U.S. State Department, our leaders hired a firm of American mercenaries allowing the Muslim Croats to create a national army which successfully ejected 150,000 Croatian Serb civilians from the country. This success brought lucrative financial contracts from Islamic countries elsewhere. It was with the help of certain Islamic states that funding for participation by the American firm was concluded.

George W. Bush signing the acknowledgement that Kosovo was an independent nation is one more finger in the eye of the Orthodox people of Central Europe.

It fails miserably to recognize the extent of Islamic Wahabbi Saudi funded mosques in the region and what that portends for the rest of Europe. Recognition of Kosovo independence will do nothing to promote democracy in that part of the world.

More likely it will mean more problems for the United States and Europe in the region. We now have another nation in the heart of Central Europe that is a home to drug cartels, mafia, and frankly, many potential Muslim terrorists.


Recognition of Kosovo’s independence also drives another stake into what is left of our shaky relationship with Russia. Our policies since the end of the Cold War towards that nation may just doom us to relive another Cold War of sorts. Isn’t it odd that former atheistic Soviet Union is supporting a Christian society of Orthodox believers while the last two American administrations enable a growing arc of Islamic power and Arab militarism to form in the suburbs of Europe.