Comments on: President Obama: New Man, Old System… What will this mean for Change?

By: The Dictator

The Dictator — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 06:45:34 +0000

I would be shocked if Obama makes any attempt at any major Middle East Peace deal involving a resolution to the conflict in the Levant. First, I would point out yes the White House Chief of Staff is a powerful figure in policy formation. It maybe more indirect then say Secretary of State but it is no the less significant because the Chief of Staff can dictate how much air time you can have with the President. I’m not particularly concerned about Emanuel in the fact he’s pro-Israeli… I’m more concerned in that he has a very partisan reputation which doesn’t mix well with Obama’s “change” message (for those of you who didn’t know he is in part the inspiration for the character Josh Lyman on the West Wing). And besides if you were really worried about pro-Israeli lobby well Obama has Dennis Ross as an adviser who worked for Aipac an Israeli lobbying firm. And having pro-Israeli advisers doesn’t spell doom for any peace initiative either. There “Peace Plan” is stagnant because there is no Palestinian partner to negotiate with. Hamas & Fatah must make up first and make a unity government otherwise the other will simply reject an negotiation the other has made on the simple ground of exclusion. They basically fought a civil war against each other resulting in Hamas controlled Gaza and Fatah held West Bank. This is not a relationship US can heal since they are too blame in part for the breakup. It will be up to the Arab states to push these parties to “kiss and makeup”. But the Arab states are just as divided… and there is a mini regional “Great Game” of sorts being played out in the Levant by Egypt, Jordan & Saudi vs. Syria and Iran. Any peace initiative will only have a fighting chance to succeed if Israel & Syria make peace. Although, they are in talks now there will be no change until Bush is gone and after Israeli elections are over (which are very tight). Which throws another dynamic into the mix if Likud wins and brings back hardliner Netanyahu then it will take greater pressure on the US’s part to compel Israel to give up the Golan (the pre-req for peace with Syria). If Israel & Syria can’t make peace then continued escalation between Hezbollah and Israel can produce a Sumer War Part 2 in which neither side will come out a clear wined and Lebanese and and northern Israelis will suffer. Not to mention Syria will continue to send aid and Iranian funds to Hamas which will make them less likely to want to make a deal with Fatah and create a unified Palestinians government which there needs to be if there is to be a two state solution. And without a Palestinian state and peace between Israel & Syria, Lebanon will continue to be a powder keg and the Lebanese people will be lucky if the Doha agreement lasts for more than a few years. The US role in all this is to push Israel to give back the Golan to Syria and make peace with formal diplomatic ties and stop settlement expansion. In exchange for Syria to clamp down on the various militant groups they fund and help compel a Hamas/Fatah union. Another dagger in the peace lover’s dream is the economy stupid. Obama’s #1 concern is the economy and I don’t see this being fixed very quickly and could quickly eat up his entire first term. Not to mention Obama’s peace in Iraq plan is really a transfer to Afghanistan plan. So there still will be a major conflict in a country which has never been subdued from Alexander the Great to the USSR. Bad economy + bloody War in Afghanistan and a possible spill over into dangerously instable Pakistan will make Obama look more like Nixon’s promise to end the war yet invaded Cambodia to do it… this can spell no second term which means no Peace deal in the next 4+ years. Now if the economy can be stabilized in 2 years or less then maybe we can have something going. So the amount of pressure US can put on Israel & Syria (which are incapable of making peace by themselves) will directly correlate on how quickly the economy recovers. I know I painted a bleak picture… but I hope it recovers quickly for people’s jobs and refugees alike. Just hope i’m wrong… As much as it’s magical to finally see an African American become President after what this country has gone through… it is equally important to note that the “happily ever after” doesn’t happen with just the election. Lets see what he can do!

By: awaheed

awaheed — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 15:21:23 +0000

Thanks for the kind words guys. As for my comment about Obama’s selection of Emanuel, I’m aware that the chief of staff doesn’t dictate public policy, that it’s the president who dictates public policy. Which is why I reemphasize my belief in Obama. I like that he’s open and listens, and I’m impressed with the fact that he is not afraid to surround himself with people he disagrees with. I’m also well aware that he was among the few in the House who had enough integrity and foresight to oppose the War in Iraq.

Look, I don’t expect US Middle-East policy to change drastically, if at all. But that doesn’t mean I will discontinue having reservations about those in office who agree with the injustice being delved out in the region everyday since 1948, especially those who are the president’s “closest ear.” Hence why I said that although I trust Obama and believe in his abilities and intentions, I remain skeptical of the political machine he’s now in; making me wonder how that combination will come to define change.

By: omar siddiqui

omar siddiqui — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 02:03:05 +0000

ASAK!!!

Awesome blog Amina!!!! I got here thru facebook, which probably the only good thing that website has done for me in a while.

You’re right, those of us who have had a taste of international politics feel like we are too smart to start feeling idealistic or romantic about one politician or one election…but Obama definitely tempts us!!!

Ofcourse Obama will have to compromise his personal beliefs with the agendas of Congress, lobbyists, and other influential groups. And although he may be president, a lot of the decisions coming out of Washington will be in the hands of the State department. I guess we will have to wait and see.

By: Farid

Farid — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 23:27:52 +0000

Salaam,

Good post but what you have to understand is that the chief of staff is not a policy maker in international matters. The most he can do is give advice. His main job is to get things done around the white house. The secretary of state and all those main people in the cabinet including the President are the decesion makers. Chief of staff has very little input if any in matters concerning international and domestic matters.