POLITICS-GHANA: The Steep Price of Getting Elected

Global Geopolitics Net Sites / IPS
Thursday, October 16, 2008

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2008.

Francis Kokutse

ACCRA, Oct 16 (IPS) – Mawusi Awity and her husband were willing to jeopardize his military career for her dream of running for parliament in Ghana but there was another price to pay that she could not afford.

”The excessive use of money to win the minds and hearts of the voters is making it difficult for women to get into the forefront of politics,” Awity told IPS.

A development worker and district assemblywoman for the ruling New Patriotic Party (NPP), Awity, 46, is one of a handful of women trying to move into Ghana’s political arena. Her story shows the need to re-draw political rules in this democratic West African country (pop.23 million).
[Read more...]

CANADA: Conservatives Win Minority Govt Amid Larger Battle

Global Geopolitics Net Sites / IPS
Wednesday, October 15, 2008

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2008.

Analysis by Chris Arsenault

VANCOUVER, Oct 15 (IPS) – While Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservatives will continue ruling Canada as a minority government, they are several steps closer to a coveted parliamentary majority after Tuesday’s general election.

The Conservatives increased their parliamentary seat count by 16 to 143. The opposition Liberals led by Stéphane Dion lost 17 seats to finish with 76. Jack Layton and the New Democratic Party (NDP) won 37 seats, an increase of 7. The Bloc Quebecois, which only runs candidates in Quebec, won 50 seats up from 44 in the last election.

Despite optimistic polling numbers and inclusion in the televised leaders’ debate, the Green Party did not win any seats in Canada’s first past the post voting system.

The Conservatives won about 37 percent of the popular vote, up one percentage point from the 2006 election. The Liberals’ popular vote dropped to 27 percent, one of the lowest levels in the party’s history.
[Read more...]

POLITICS-US: Foreclosure Victims May Lose Votes as Well

Global Geopolitics Net Sites / IPS
Monday, October 13, 2008

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2008.

Bankole Thompson

DETROIT, Michigan, Oct 13 (IPS) – An alleged purge of registered voters, many of whom lost their homes to bank foreclosure, in the state of Michigan has prompted a lawsuit and calls in Congress for a Justice Department investigation.

At the centre of this possible election debacle in Michigan, where Democrat Sen. Barack Obama is leading his Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain, is Republican Secretary of State Terry Lynn Land, who has been criticised in the past by a federal judge for restricting access to ”provisional ballots” by voters uncertain about their voting precincts.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Advancement Project filed a suit in U.S. District Court in Detroit last month against Land, her director of elections Christopher Thomas, and Ypsilanti City Clerk Frances McMullen for using two programmes to remove voters from the rolls without proper federal procedure.

The first programme used by the state, according to the lawsuit, is the immediate cancellation of the drivers’ licenses of Michiganders who have obtained licenses in other states without the appropriate confirmation of registration notices.

Under the second removal programme, election clerks automatically eliminate names of voters from the files who may have moved from their registered addresses, instead of sending them a warning notice by forwarded mail.

”The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 states that, if a registrar receives information suggesting a voter has moved from their registration address, they should send them a confirmation of registration notice by forwarded mail, including a postage-prepaid return card, and ask them to confirm the address,” said Bradley Heard, the Advancement Project’s lead attorney, in the lawsuit.

”The registrar also can flag the voter’s record for confirmation if the voter appears to vote. If the voter does not either respond to that notice or appear to vote within two federal general elections from the date of the notice [the ones that occur in November of even-numbered years], the voter can be removed from the rolls.”

These removal programmes could have a devastating impact in minority and low-income areas hardest hit by the mortgage crisis like Wayne County, home to large African American and Hispanic communities — key voting blocs for Democrats.

The federal lawsuit is before Judge Stephen Murphy, the immediate past U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan. Murphy said he will review arguments from both sides before ruling whether to stop the two programmes.

IPS found that from January to September of this year, 17,691 homes have been foreclosed in Wayne County, the state’s largest county which led the nation in 2007 in foreclosures for large metropolitan areas.

Recently, Macomb County, a swing county home to many conservative-leaning so-called Reagan Democrats, was in the news for the reported statements of its Republican Party chairman James Carabelli that the party is planning to use a list of foreclosed homes to prevent people from voting in the November presidential election.

”We will have a list of foreclosed homes and will make sure people aren’t voting from those addresses,” Carabelli reportedly told the Michigan Messenger in a phone interview. He would later deny the comments.

In 2004, John Pappageorge, a Republican state senator from Oakland County, a Republican stronghold — where polls now show Obama beating McCain among independents (48 percent to 25 percent) and women (55 percent to 37percent) — called for suppression of the Detroit vote to win the election.

”We are deeply troubled by recent media reports that the chairman of the Michigan Republican Party in Macomb County is planning to use a list of foreclosed homes as a basis to challenge voters and block them from participating in the election,” House Judiciary Committee chairman John Conyers wrote to U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey.

”We are writing to request that the Department of Justice launch a full scale investigation into the matter. Given the number of voting rights complaints filed after the 2004 election it is critical that the Department take proactive steps now to prevent voting rights violations in November,” Conyers wrote.

The letter added, ”The plan should be investigated as a possible violation of the Voting Rights Act.”

The Justice Department will meet with Conyers this week to address concerns about voters being challenged on their foreclosure status.

The Centre for Responsible Lending said Michigan, California, Washington D.C., New Jersey, and Nevada have high mortgage defaults. The report estimated that 10 percent of African American borrowers and 8 percent of Hispanic borrowers will be affected by foreclosures compared to 4 percent of white borrowers.

It is not clear how many voters have been purged.

But Thomas, the state election director, said about 70,000 people are removed on an annual basis because of the change in their driver’s license, and that about 1,400 people have been removed since the start of this year because of their returned ID card.

”We think the actual numbers will be higher, but that will be the subject of the discovery in the case,” Heard said.

The New York Times reported that based on its own findings Michigan removed 33,000 people from the voter roll.

Thomas denied the report and said overall only 11,000 were removed because of death or authorised change notifications.

The Times ranked Michigan among five other swing states — Colorado, Indiana, Ohio, Nevada and North Carolina — that unintentionally purged voters.

Detroit City Clerk Janice Winfrey, who has registered 28,000 new voters, told IPS that 1,567 records have been purged from the Detroit voter file because they are considered ”inactive”, meaning the person is deceased or notified election officials they’ve moved out of state.

To date, Winfrey said Detroit has 634,444 registered voters for Nov. 4. and only 90,000 of that figure voted in the primary election.

”We need to make sure every vote counts and that people are registered to vote,” said Mildred Madison of the League of Women Voters in Detroit.

U.S.: McCain Sinks on Economy, Palin Pick, Negative Attacks

Global Geopolitics Net Sites – Global News Blog / IPS
October 11, 2008

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2008.

Analysis by Jim Lobe*

WASHINGTON, Oct 11 (IPS) – Overwhelmed by crashing stock markets and what is increasingly seen by even traditional conservatives as a Faustian bargain with the extreme right-wing core of his Republican Party, Sen. John McCain’s chances of winning the Nov. 4 presidential elections have fallen sharply over the past three weeks.

Asked by the influential National Journal after the presidential debate Tuesday to estimate Democratic Sen. Barack Obama’s chances of defeating McCain, 76 Republican ”insiders” rated them on average at 73 percent — up from 53 percent just three weeks ago.

Betters on the two biggest Internet gambling sites agree. The Iowa Electronic Markets (www.biz.uiowa.edu/iem), run by the College of Business of the University of Iowa, is currently rating McCain’s chances of winning the White House at less than one in six, significantly worse than the better than one-to-three odds it offered as recently as Sep 29.

Its main competitor, the Intrade Prediction Market (www.intrade.), rates McCain’s chances as somewhat better — at around 21.5 percent. But that, too, represents a substantial drop from the 39 percent chance it gave him ten days ago. In mid-September, less than one month ago, Intrade was giving McCain roughly even odds with Obama.

Meanwhile, one of the most closely-monitored poll websites, www.fivethirtyeight.com, is now rating Obama’s chances of winning the election in the all-important electoral college at just over 90 percent, up from 80 percent at the end of September.

”(A)ny world in which McCain has a chance to win on Election Day is a world that looks very different from this one — some significant event will have to have occurred to fundamentally change the momentum of the race,” noted the website’s founder and chief analyst, Nate Silver, Friday after the publication of a spate of new polls from key ”swing states” where the election will be decided.

According to those polls, Obama is not only widening his leads in states won by former Vice President Al Gore in 2000 and by Sen. John Kerry in 2004, he has also drawn even with or even surpassed McCain in several key states — notably in Ohio, Virginia, Colorado, Florida, and even North Carolina — that McCain must win in order to have any chance of prevailing.

McCain’s decline also is increasingly threatening Republicans hopes of minimising their anticipated losses in Congressional races.

Before this week, Democrats had been expected to pick up at least five seats in the Senate, bringing their total there to 56. But new polls published this week suggest that several other states where Republican incumbents were expected to win are now considered either too close to call or leaning Democratic. If all of them went Democratic — roughly a 25 percent chance, according to 538′s statistical models — the party would gain a filibuster-proof 60 seats.

As for the House of Representatives, Democrats believe they could gain as many as 30 seats, giving them 60 percent of the 435 seats, their largest majority since 1964 when Democratic dominance of Congress reached its zenith under President Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

McCain’s and the Republican plunge is being blamed primarily on the ongoing financial crisis; U.S. stocks fell Friday for the eight straight day, capping one of the worst weeks since the 1929 Crash that set off the Great Depression with which the current situation is being increasingly compared.

While McCain repeatedly insisted during Tuesday’s debate that he knew how to restore trust and confidence in the financial system, he was noticeably more vague than Obama who repeatedly reminded the audience of more than 60 million viewers that, throughout his career in Congress, including during George W. Bush’s presidency — which last week hit the lowest approval ratings of any presidency in the last 56 years — McCain had supported deregulation measures that are widely seen as one of the main causes of the current crisis.

”John McCain has lost control of the economic issue, and the debate over the financial crisis has made voters doubt him,” according to veteran Democratic pollster Peter Hart whose assessment, significantly, was quoted by one of the capital’s chief public-opinion gurus, the Journal’s Charlie Cook.

As to the debate itself and the polls, particularly of independent voters, taken immediately afterward, Silver concluded that Obama had won ”according to essentially every objective metric.” Indeed, those surveys showed that Obama prevailed ? often by large margins ? not only with respect to the question of who performed better, but also who was more trustworthy and presidential.

”John McCain needed a breakthrough during Tuesday night’s debate,” wrote Cook in his weekly Friday column. ”If he got it, I must have been watching the wrong channel. The heightened economic and credit crisis has effectively changed the venue of this election to turf that is virtually unwinnable for a Republican presidential candidate.”

But if the financial crisis — a crisis that Republicans had vainly hoped would have been behind them after last week’s Congressional approval of the administration’s 700-billion- dollar bailout package — best explains the plunge in McCain’s electoral chances, it appears that his surrender to the right-wing base of the party — signaled most dramatically by his selection of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running-mate, as well as her performance in both her rare and highly scripted media interviews and on the stump — is also a major contributing factor.

While Palin has largely succeeded in energising the party’s ideological core, virtually ever poll published in the last three weeks, including those following her debate with Obama’s running-mate, Sen. Joseph Biden, has shown that she is acting as a drag on the ticket among all-important independent voters, who make up about a third of the electorate.

Friday’s publication by a Republican-dominated Legislative Council of a report in which a special investigator found that Palin had abused her power as governor in seeking the dismissal of her ex-brother-in-law from the state police will clearly raise new questions about her fitness for the vice presidency.

Moreover, her apparent role as the spear point for attacks on Obama’s ”character” — including his past associations with William Ayers, a University of Chicago education professor who was a leader of the terrorist Weather Underground 40 years ago and black liberation theologian Rev. Jeremiah Wright — as well as the increasingly angry and openly hostile crowds that she is drawing to her rallies appear to be alienating more traditional, conservative Republicans.

Earlier this week, neo-conservative David Brooks wrote in his New York Times column that Palin ”represents a fatal cancer to the Republican Party,” while, in an open letter to McCain published in the Baltimore Sun Friday, former Christian Right leader and one-time McCain supporter, author Frank Schaeffer, warned McCain that his and Palin’s joint rallies ”are beginning to look sound, feel and smell like lynch mobs”.

”If your campaign does not stop equating Sen. Barack Obama with terrorism, questioning his patriotism and portraying (him) as ‘not one of us,’ I accuse you of deliberately feeding the most unhinged elements of our society the red meat of hate, and therefore of potentially instigating violence,” he wrote.

Even more dramatic in its own way was the announcement Friday by essayist and one-time McCain speech-writer Christopher Buckley, son of the intellectual founder of the modern conservative Republican movement, William F. Buckley, that he will vote Obama for president.

Noting that his father once told him, ”You know, I’ve spent my entire lifetime separating the Right from the kooks,” Christopher, who has known and supported McCain personally since 1982 and still writes a column for his father’s National Review, wrote, ”Sarah Palin is an embarrassment, and a dangerous one at that.”

*Jim Lobe’s blog on U.S. foreign policy, and particularly the neo-conservative influence in the Bush administration, can be read at http://www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/.

POLITICS-INDIA: Polls Uncertain With Jammu Divided from Kashmir

Global Geopolitics Net Sites / IPS
Sunday, September 21, 2008

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2008.

Athar Parvaiz Bhat

SRINAGAR, Sep 21 (IPS) – Plans by the central government to conduct elections in Jammu and Kashmir, due originally in November, remain uncertain because of the serious regional and religious differences that have cropped up between the two main regions that make up the composite territory.

Relations between Hindu-majority Jammu and the Muslim-dominated Kashmir valley have been souring since May over a move to transfer forest land to a board that manages a popular, annual pilgrimage to the Hindu cave shrine of Amarnath, deep in the Kashmir Himalayas.

Agitations over the controversial move resulted in the regional People’s Democratic Party (PDP) withdrawing support to the coalition government led by chief minister Ghulam Nabi Azad of the Congress party and the state being placed under direct central rule on Jul. 7.

And now, the federal government, the election commission, political parties and civil society leaders are unable to agree on when to schedule elections for a new state assembly.

”I don’t think holding elections would be a good thing to do at a time when the state is passing through a difficult situation. The entire state is on edge due to the communal and regional tension. I reckon that it will cause the situation to deteriorate further,” Balraj Puri, a noted expert on the Kashmir conflict who is based in Jammu, told IPS.

”Let the situation calm down. I think an internal dialogue between the two regions should be started on a priority basis to bring about a rapprochement,” said Puri who favours autonomy for the different regions of the state.

Prof. Rekha Choudhary, who teaches political science at Jammu University, believes that by planning to hold elections the central government appeared to be insensitive to the serious regional polarisation that has occurred. ”I think holding elections in the state in the current circumstances would be a huge risk. We have never seen the kind of hostilities between the regions of the state like what exists today,” she said.

Choudhary said the central government seems to be driven by the belief that holding elections would help bridge the gap between the Jammu and Kashmir regions. ”In Kashmir pro-freedom groups that have appealed for a total boycott of the elections are going to gain in popularity by capitalising on the popular mood of hostility against India. And in Jammu, the right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) which favoured the land transfer to the Hindu shrine board, is going to benefit,” she said.

India’s Kashmir state is a classic example of linguistic and ethno-religious diversity and comprises the three distinct regions of Kashmir, Jammu and Ladakh. Together, these regions are known to the world as Indian Administered Kashmir.

About 55 percent of the state’s total population of 10 million is settled in the alpine Kashmir region, traditionally the seat of power. While 98 percent of the people who live in Kashmir are Muslim, Jammu’s population is 60 percent Hindu. Ladakh accounts for two percent of the total population.

About a third of the area of the former princely state Jammu and Kashmir is under the administration of Pakistan.

In 1989, people in Muslim-dominated Kashmir began an armed struggle in favour of freedom from India and this spilled over into the Muslim areas of Jammu.

Political analysts say the mistrust between the Jammu and Kashmir regions has been brewing for a long time. The people and leaders of these regions have been competing for central developmental funds and prized positions in administration.

”The government of India never tried to evolve a mechanism to hold all the regions together in order to give them a feeling of belongingness. It never had a focused policy regarding Kashmir and was keen on installing puppet regimes in the state which would serve its own interests,” observes Gul Mohammad Wani who teaches political science at Kashmir University.

”Jammu region is demanding a greater share in power which, according to them, has always remained centred in Kashmir. On the contrary, people in the Kashmir region are demanding complete freedom from India,” Wani said.

Observers say that if the elections are not held by November, they will have to be postponed till April given the harsh winter in Kashmir and Ladakh. Out of a total of 87 assembly constituencies, a majority of them, 50, fall in Kashmir.

Most political parties prefer to delay polls till next year. The exception remains the pro-Hindu BJP which may benefit from the communal divisions, especially in Jammu.

”We suggest that congenial conditions be created for holding elections before announcing election dates,” says Omar Abdullah, president of the pro-India National Conference party. His viewpoint is shared by Mehbooba Mufti, leader of the PDP which also favours Kashmir remaining a part of India.

At least 42 people died during the agitations against the land transfer with the movement quickly morphing into revival of calls for freedom from Indian rule — not heard for the last five years.

Suspicions between the two regions worsened after traders in the Kashmir region announced snapping of relations with their Jammu counterparts in reaction to what they called ”economic blockade” of their region by the people of Jammu during the agitation.

Kashmir receives essential supplies and exports its produce to markets in India solely through the 300 km-long Jammu-Srinagar highway.

”How can we think of maintaining trade ties with the traders from Jammu when they were party to the recent economic blockade of Kashmir by the people of Jammu,” says president of the Kashmir Chamber of Commerce and Industries (KCCI) Mubeen Shah. ”The wounds, inflicted by the economic blockade of Kashmir, will take a lot of time to heal up”

According to economists, boycotting trade with Jammu would mean immense loss to traders on both sides.

”Kashmir’s total trade is estimated at Rs 520 billion (11.3 billion US dollars) per annum out of which the yearly trade exchange between the Kashmir and Jammu regions is Rs 270 billion (six billion dollars),” says Prof. Nissar Ali who teaches economics at Kashmir University.

Traders in Kashmir have now intensified their demand for reopening the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad road, which connects Indian Kashmir with the Pakistan administered part.

Before Pakistan and India grabbed control of parts of Jammu and Kashmir in 1947, the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad road served as the main link between Kashmir and the markets of Rawalpindi in Pakistan and beyond.

On Aug. 11, thousands of Kashmiri traders and common people took out a symbolic march towards Muzaffarabad, the capital of Pakistan administered Kashmir, to assert this demand. At least five people were killed and many others injured when police, stopped the march by opening fire some 20 km ahead of the Line of Control, the de-facto border between the Indian and Pakistani parts of Kashmir.

POLITICS: Obama Clear Winner in World Opinion

Global Geopolitics – Global News Blog – Global Analyst Online – IPS
Friday, September 12, 2008

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2008.

Ali Gharib

WASHINGTON, Sep12 (IPS) – In a new international poll by the BBC World Service, all 22 countries surveyed would prefer that Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama wins the U.S. presidential election on Nov. 4.

The 22 countries, drawn from six continents, preferred Obama over his Republican rival, Sen. John McCain, by an average four to one margin.

The poll confirms the conventional wisdom that, while the race is tightening in the polls at home, the world wants to see an Obama presidency — a notion that was mocked by the McCain campaign after an Obama speech in Berlin attended by 200,000 people.

”Large numbers of people around the world clearly like what Barack Obama represents,” said Doug Miller, the chairman of the international polling firm Globescan, who conducted the poll for the BBC with the help of University of Maryland’s Programme on International Policy Attitudes.

In another question in the BBC poll, more than three-quarters of the countries said that an Obama presidency would see improved U.S. relations with the rest of the world. On average, 46 percent of respondents think that relations would get better with Obama at the helm, 22 percent said they would stay the same, and 7 percent thought they would get worse.

One in five of those surveyed thought that a McCain presidency would bring better relations between the U.S. and the world. A plurality of 37 percent said that relations under McCain would stay the same, and 16 percent thought that they would get worse.

”Given how negative America’s international image is at present, it is quite striking that only one in five think a McCain presidency would improve on the [George W.] Bush administration’s relations with the world,” said Miller in a statement releasing the poll results.

A BBC World Service poll earlier this year showed that nearly half of the people in countries surveyed viewed U.S. influence on the world negatively.

In the recent poll, the U.S.’s allies in NATO — many of whom did not participate in the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq as the non-NATO ”coalition of the willing” — were the most optimistic that an Obama presidency would bring better relations.

More than 60 percent of respondents in Canada, France, German, and Italy, and over half of those surveyed in Britain said Obama would improve strained relations with the world.

Only China, Nigeria and India thought that a McCain presidency would improve relations with the rest of the world and in all three places that preference was only by a ”modest margin” over Obama.

In a separate poll released with the results of the international poll, U.S. citizens agreed with the prevailing world opinion that Obama stood a better chance of improving relations with the world. Nearly half thought that an Obama-led U.S. would have better relations with the globe, and 26 percent expected relations to be improved under McCain.

In Kenya, where Obama has roots through his father, people overwhelming support an Obama presidency — 87 percent, the largest majority of the countries surveyed — and nearly nine in 10 surveyed said both that they think U.S. relations with the world will improve and that ”their perception of the U.S. would fundamentally change” were Obama elected.

Nearly half of respondents worldwide — and majorities and pluralities of 15 of the 22 countries polled — agreed with the Kenyans on the issue of a ”fundamental change” in their perception of the U.S. Just over a quarter said their image of the U.S. would remain static if Obama is elected.

Just as in the U.S., Obama’s international support was especially strong among young respondents and well-educated respondents. But the gaps with older and less-educated respondents were not significant.

While over half of those surveyed under the age of 35 supported Obama, his support among respondents over 55 years old was nearly equally strong at 47 percent. Six in 10 of those with university-level education and four in 10 of those with only primary education preferred Obama.

Turkey was the only country where significantly more people thought that U.S.-world relations would suffer from an Obama presidency rather than a McCain presidency. But in an apparent contradiction, Turks preferred Obama to be president.

Several of the countries polled had a majority of respondents showing no preference for either candidate. Most notably was recently re-emergent Russia, with fully three quarters of the respondents failing to express a preference. Middle Eastern countries Turkey and Egypt also had majorities of just over 60 percent with no preference.

Pakistan Elects Civilian President, Zardari promises change

Global Geopolitics – Global News Blog – Global Politics Online
Saturday, September 06, 2008

© Copyright 2008 Malladi Rama Rao & Atul Cowshish. All rights reserved.

M Rama Rao & Atul Cowshish

(the authors are Delhi based journalists)

During the last days of Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf as president of Pakistan his countrymen as well the rest of the world was pining to see a civilian occupying the presidential palace in Islamabad. That wish seems to have been fulfilled with the election of the Pakistan People’s Party co-chairman, Asif Ali Zardari as the president of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan by an ‘overwhelming majority’ in a three –cornered contest. The Electoral College for the presidential poll comprises the two houses of parliament, and the four provincial assemblies. The 53-year old widower swept polling in the assemblies of North West Frontier Province, Sindh and Balochistan and secured more than half of the votes on offer in Parliament.

Now, what remains to be answered is: do the people of Pakistan feel more sure of their future under a ‘civilian’ president than they did under Musharraf, who doffed his uniform most reluctantly and that too only a little before quitting? The answer does not seem to be ‘yes’.

How can there be a different answer when the coalition has failed, an assassination bid has been made on the prime minister and the march of the Taliban into areas outside their old holds is becoming unstoppable. The US-propped economy is in doldrums, making the people more restive than they were before the polls. There is no guarantee that the civilian Pakistani leaders will be able to improve ties with the two neighbours on its eastern and western borders. The Americans are running out of patience with Pakistan. Conditions already look ripe for another army coup in Pakistan.

Manoeuvres by Zardari prior to getting himself a huge promotion have made it clear that the post-Musharraf Pakistan is unlikely to be radically different. Some in the country suspect that he is and has been in cahoots with Musharraf. They have also accused him of placing his self-interest above that of the nation.

When Pakistan Muslim League (N) leader, Nawaz Sharif announced his final break with the PPP, Zardari called the former ‘immature’. But it is Zardari who appears to have acted immaturely. Despite forming a front with Sharif that trounced Musharraf and his PML (Q) in the February polls he parted company with Sharif and plunged the country into instability at a crucial juncture. He reneged on the promise of restoring the senior judges removed by Musharraf because he feared that the chief justice, Iftikhar Chaudhary, can upturn a Musharraf decree that granted him pardon in the many criminal charges that were framed against him- most of them dating back to Nawaz Sharif rule.

Next he has it conveyed to Sharif that the old cases of corruption against him, started at the behest of Musharraf, would be reopened should he stick with his decision to oppose the PPP-led regime and its leader Zardari. That will seal any chances of revival of the grand coalition, so necessary if Pakistan is looking for stability.

Pakistan’s hope of seeing happier times politically with a grand coalition between the two main parties, PPP and PML (N), have been dashed. Zardari, never a popular leader, is yielding ground to Sharif as the country’s top civilian leader. The longevity of the PPP-led government is in doubt.

As political foes Zardari and Sharif can only bring more trouble to their country even as the wily general must be laughing as he prepares to move into his luxurious countryside villa close to Islamabad. The prospects of democracy—that is, a system where the army is under civilian control—returning to Pakistan already look discouraging.

Musharraf may not be able to stage a comeback but another army take-over or excessive army interference in the civilian rule may not be very far. The army chief, Gen Ashfaq Kayani, is perhaps waiting for the moment when he ‘rescues’ the nation again with another spell of military rule.

In a matter of six months the Islamist militancy in Pakistan has risen to unprecedented levels with bombs and suicide attacks taking their toll in many ‘settled’ areas, including the federal capital and its close by garrison town, Rawalpindi. The world was led to believe that Islamist militancy would start waning once the general goes away. The opposite has come true.

The civilian administration in Pakistan is clueless about handling the Taliban menace within the country. It cannot find a solution if it continues, as it has, the Musharraf double game of protecting one section of the Islamists who have been entrusted the task of waging a jihad against India. The government’s fight against the other section that is now advancing into the ‘settled areas’ in the NWFP is destined to fail because a large section in the country supports them.

A religious party that is still part of the PPP-led coalition openly backs the Taliban philosophy. For that matter the only reason why Sharif is not acceptable to Washington is that he is suspected to be close to the ideologues of the militants. Within the army itself the radical elements recruited into the officers’ cadre during the regime of late Gen Zia-ul-Haq has now reached senior positions. In a couple of years some of them would become core commanders. The fight against the Taliban and other Islamist militants within Pakistan will only get weaker.

That must be causing a great deal of worry to the US which in the past had deliberately kept its eyes shut as Pakistan went about building a huge force of religiously-driven militants. India can be no less concerned as jingoist slogans become more frequent in Pakistan and Kashmir is restored to its previous position as the ‘core’ issue that has to be resolved for any real peace with India.

Pakistan’s commitment to fighting the Islamist militants operating along the Afghan borders and inside Kashmir and rest of India will be reduced to mere symbolism by the civilian government. Failure to do so would be seen by the vast majority of Pakistanis as yielding to the American pressure and giving ‘concessions’ to India, which is still regarded as “enemy No.1”.

That leaves the question: how will then Pakistan eliminate the threat that these militants pose to itself? Musharraf had thought guns would solve this problem. He proved wrong and in the process became an object of hate among the radicalised sections—very many in numbers—in the country. He also ran foul of Americans by his reluctance to give in to the more determined Americans a free hand in chasing the Taliban sheltered on the Pakistani side of the Pakistan-Afghan border. How can then a civilian government, getting weaker by the day, solve this problem, as well many other problems that have been either inherited or cropped up after the February polls like 25 per cent inflation, food and power rites, dwindling forex reserves, sectarian unrest and above all political instability?

POLITICS-US: Red, White and Blue… But Mostly White

Global Geopolitics – Global News Blog – Global Politics Online – IPS
Friday, September 05, 2008

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2008.

Ali Gharib

WASHINGTON, Sep 5 (IPS) – Don’t adjust your television set. There is no problem with your signal; it’s just that all the colour was missing from the Republican National Convention, which concluded last night with Sen. John McCain’s speech accepting the party nomination.

Despite the soaring minority population of the U.S., those demographic groups’ representation dwindled at the quadrennial Republican Presidential nomination.

As the cameras panned over the party faithful interrupting McCain’s speech with booming chants of ”U.S.A.”, few faces of colour could be seen in the crowd.

Of 2,380 delegates to this week’s convention in St. Paul, Minnesota, only 36 were black, said a report from the Joint Centre for Political and Economic Studies. The number was a sharp decline from the 2004 convention, which boasted a record 167 black Republican delegates.

The staggeringly low number made this year’s Republican National Convention (RNC) the whitest in the 40 years since the Joint Centre began tracking the information.

It was then, in 1968, that Richard Nixon won in major part due to his ”Southern strategy” — an effort to woo white Southerners who felt threatened by the civil rights movement being supported by Democrats.

Since then, the party has played to the base it developed, often at the expense of the minority vote.

Political analyst Earl Ofari Hutchinson contends that the Southern strategy has worked well and yielded four decades of Republican dominance in the executive.

”To keep that, you cannot tilt in any way to minorities. It obliterates the strategy,” Hutchinson told IPS. ”It’s an ideological party with a very defined conservative base. To say it’s a racist party misses the point. African Americans are not the heart and soul of the party in terms of how they win elections. It’s a political calculus.”

”Making too overt of a racial pitch is essentially going to alienate the party’s base,” he said.

But Hutchinson, author of the new book, ”The GOP Can Keep the White House, How the Democrats Can Take it Back”, noted that there was also a disconnect between African Americans and the Republican platform.

Hutchinson says that the conservative heartland appeal of militarism and reduced government are unattractive to blacks. African Americans have overwhelmingly opposed the war in Iraq and support social programmes which they see as benefiting their communities.

In his speech, McCain reaffirmed his unflinching support for the war and called for the party to get back to its Ronald Reagan-era Republican roots — low taxes and small government — that sharply cut social programmes in the 1980s.

”There’s always a sense that the billions being spent on the Iraq war could be better spent on domestic social programmes,” said Hutchinson. ”These are the types of programmes that could have a great impact on the lives of African Americans.”

In the mid 1990s and through the administration of Pres. George W. Bush, Republicans were making a strong pitch to minorities and starting to reap the electoral benefits.

But the McCain-led Republican convention showed backsliding in this regard. Dr. David Bositis of the Joint Centre said the reasons were three-fold.

He said that a non-incumbent nominee exerts less power over the convention, and Bush had come from a state with the third largest black population in the country.

”McCain on the other hand — as Fred Sanford would say, Y-T. Say it fast,” Bositis told IPS, noting that McCain hails from a much whiter state (Arizona), and that he came up through the Navy (the whitest branch of the armed services). ”He just has no connection to African Americans whatsoever.”

The third and perhaps most important reason for McCain’s dearth of black support is that his Democratic rival, Sen. Barack Obama, is himself part black and tremendously popular with African-Americans.

”You put those three things together and it’s not a surprise that there are no black people there,” said Bositis.

African Americans were not the only minority who found themselves wondering what had happened. Latinos — a rapidly expanding demographic amongst whom Bush made sharp gains in 2000 and 2004 — also saw their numbers dwindle at the RNC.

”Bush, in his second run at it, got close to half of the Latino vote,” said Brent Wilkes, the executive director of League of Unified Latin-American Citizens (LULAC). ”I really do think it’s very disappointing; especially McCain. Perhaps he felt his more important priority was to bring in the base, the white Republican, than worry about the minority voter.”

According to LULAC, five percent of the Republican delegates this year were Hispanic, the lowest since 1996.

Bush made gains with Latino voters with wedge issues like opposition to gay marriage and pressing his faith-based initiative, which religious Latinos were attracted to.

But another wedge issue, a virulent anti-immigration plank used to galvanise the party base, could be the undoing of Republican efforts to court Latinos.

McCain has been viewed as a moderate on the immigration issue in the past. He co-sponsored compromise immigration reform legislation with liberal Sen. Ted Kennedy in 2005 and helped craft a 2007 update, both of which were defeated.

But to placate the base, McCain backed away from his support for legalisation of immigrants already in the U.S. and guest-worker permits for those wanting in.

”Either [McCain] doesn’t have control over the convention or he’s taken a rightward track to try to appeal to his base,” said Wilkes. ”Typically you appeal to your base to win the primary and then you appeal to the centre for the general [election]. But [McCain] appears to still be tacking right.”

Wilkes contends that if Republicans would cool their rhetoric on immigration, their other wedge issues would still work well with Latino voters.

”It’s pretty jarring to watch the whole thing and see all the non-minority people out there,” said Wilkes. ”It’s hard not to wonder how long the party can last with that kind of white-only representation. They’re not going to be able to cede the minority vote to Democrats and still win elections.”

About 12.5 percent of U.S. citizens are black and nearly 15 percent are Latino. A Census Bureau study said that minorities will be the majority of the U.S. population in 34 years.

By contrast with the RNC, 11 percent of delegates to the Democratic National Convention (DNC) in Denver were Latino, according to LULAC. The Joint Centre report, ”Blacks and the 2008 Democratic National Convention”, said that 1,079 of the 4,418 Democratic delegates were black.

While black Republican delegates numbers dropped by 131, their Democratic counterparts increased their numbers by 208, according to the Joint Centre.

POLITICS-ANGOLA: Economy Weighing On Voters’ Minds

Global Geopolitics – Global News Blog – Global Politics Online – IPS
Thursday, September 04, 2008

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2008.

Louise Redvers

LUANDA, Sep 4 (IPS) – Angola’s economy may be booming on the back of high oil prices and strong diamond exports, but six years after a peace deal ended the 27-year civil war, unemployment stands at around 65 percent.

Take a walk down any street in Luanda and next to the shiny banks and new office buildings, there are street vendors, many just teenagers, hawking anything they can find to make a living.

This lack of jobs and the country’s poor education system are some of the major debating points for voters ahead of Friday’s election.

Ask anyone here what they want from politicians and while they usually say peace, their second wish is a job or the guarantee of a job for their children.

Bella, who looks significantly older than her 24 years, sells fruit on a patch of pavement near the National Assembly building.

The pomp and majesty of the guards outside the parliament cut a stark contrast to Bella’s modest fruit stall which is swarming with flies and sits just metres from puddles of stagnant water.

On a good day Bella makes up to 1,300 kwanzas ($17), but often it’s a little as 500Kwz ($6) — and from that she’s got to buy her stock and pay for A taxi to transport her to her sales spot from the market.

”I’ve been doing this for four years because I can’t find another job,” she explained. ”It’s okay but I want another job to earn more money for my family. I have a four-year-old son and if I don’t make enough money, we go hungry. That’s how it is.”

One major reason for Angola’s high level of unemployment is the mass migration from the countryside into Luanda during the war.

Justino Pinto de Andrade, an economist at Luanda’s Catholic University, explained: ”These families were from agricultural backgrounds, used to working on the land.

”But in the city it isn’t possible to farm the land so they have had to find other activities, like selling things on the street, cleaning houses, driving etc. But this is not enough to create enough jobs for everyone, so we see this high number of people without work.”

Mr Andrade said while some Angolans were finding work within the oil industry, a lack of education — again because of the long war — meant many lacked the required qualifications and the jobs were going to expatriates instead.

He said there was a similar picture in the building industry, where contracts for major works like hotels and apartment blocks were usually going to Chinese, Brazilian and Portuguese companies and then these companies were importing their own unskilled labour.

”This isn’t generating jobs for Angolan workers,” he said.

Before the war, Angola was the world’s fourth biggest coffee producer and a top exporter of sugarcane, bananas and cotton.

And as the fertile countryside is slowly de-mined and made safe, agriculture is once again being seen as an area of potential.

The ruling MPLA (Movimento Popular de Libertação de Angola) says if it is re-elected, it will continue with recently-launched micro-credit schemes to help small farmers make money from their land and most opposition parties have included a policy on developing agriculture in their manifestos.

Jardo Muekalia, a senior member of UNITA (União Nacional para Independência Total de Angola), also believes developing agriculture is a key step to improve Angola’s economy.

He said: ”When the oil goes, we have no alternative. It’s almost a national security necessity to diversify our economy.

”Agriculture will not only take care of our food security but it will employ more people as it is very labour intensive, it will address the need to develop rural economies, develop the rural towns.

”Let’s use the resources we get from oil to begin to invest in our agriculture.”

A major challenge for Angola after the end of the war has been to decentralise. The MPLA, founded on Marxist principles, for many years focussed on government-led schemes. There is now a movement towards the private sector.

Luanda-based economist Salim Abdul explained: ”In the long-term you have to invest in human capital, through education, through health, through living conditions to improve people’s performance, their productivity and their knowledge.

”You can have your natural resources but if you don’t manage them effectively it is no good. You have to manage the human capital and that takes generations.

”If you look at India, China, Japan, how they developed was by human capital so that’s the challenge for not only Angola but the majority of countries in Africa.”

As dusk falls in central Luanda Bella gathers up her unsold fruit and makes her way back across the city to her small home.

She said: ”I will be voting, definitely. I don’t know if the election will make a difference, but I want the politicians to make more jobs, I don’t want my son to sell on the street like me when he grows up.”

POLITICS-US: ”I Appreciate This Unique Moment”

Global Geopolitics – Global News Blog – Global Politics Online – IPS
Wednesday, September 03, 2008

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2008.

Interview with Barack Obama, Democratic presidential candidate

DETROIT, Sep 3 (IPS) – Whether he wins or loses in the November election, Barack Obama will have made U.S. history as the first African American to lead a major political party.

In this Sep. 2, post-nomination exclusive interview with IPS correspondent Bankole Thompson, the Democratic presidential nominee defends his choice of Sen. Joe Biden as his vice president and answers wide-ranging questions, from the genocide in Sudan’s Darfur region, the U.S. war in Afghanistan, and the state of the economy to improving incomes and health care for all U.S. citizens.

Excerpts from the interview follow.

IPS: When you picked Sen. Joe Biden as your running mate, your critics say it changed your message of bringing change to Washington.

BARACK OBAMA: Senator Joe Biden is not a politician — he is a statesman. What I mean by that is he understands the ways of Washington, but he is not ruled by the ways of Washington, and he has always worked to maintain a strong sense of self and service in his 30-plus years in the Senate. He takes the train home every night to Delaware and has for years. He has stood up against leaders in his own party when he needed to and his foreign policy expertise is unmatched in the U.S. Senate. I selected him with the interest of the country in mind, not the politics of the moment.

IPS: Washington is known as a place of partisan rifts. How can you build a consensus and bring the change you talk about on the campaign trail and deal with the state of the economy?

BO: Right now we have a situation in Washington that is simply upside down. The town is run by lobbyists and powerful interests often at the expense of the people’s interest. As president, I’ll work in Washington to do what I have done my entire adult life: build coalitions around common goals and values to get things done. Even in this environment, I’m convinced that we share more in common than many would appreciate. The key is identifying and developing those common bonds in a way that forces government to work for and not against the American people, and engaging more Americans into our government’s decision-making.

IPS: The Bush administration has been criticised by human rights groups for not doing much in Darfur, Sudan. What will your approach be toward international conflicts like the genocide in Darfur?

BO: As president, I will make ending the genocide in Darfur a priority. I have traveled to the United Nations to meet with Sudanese officials and visited refugee camps on the Chad-Sudan border to raise international awareness of the ongoing humanitarian disaster there. As president, I will take immediate steps to end the genocide in Darfur by increasing pressure on the Sudanese and pressure the government to halt the killing and stop impeding the deployment of a robust international force. I will hold the government in Khartoum accountable for abiding by its commitments under the Comprehensive Peace Accord that ended the 30-year conflict between the north and south. I have also worked with [Republican] Senator Sam Brownback to pass the Darfur Peace and Accountability Act in 2006.

IPS: Which issue will be immediately addressed in an Obama administration? The Iraq war, labour, housing foreclosures, energy or college tuition?

BO: After eight years of President Bush and Vice President Cheney and the policies they have put in place, we know we have a lot of work to do at home and abroad. We have an economy in disarray and under assault because of rising foreclosures and falling home values, energy prices continue to consume more and more of our income and health care costs are spiraling out of control. Meanwhile, we continue to fight a war that should have never been authorised and never been waged while the real enemy continues to hide in the hills of Afghanistan. There is much work to do, but the key is to put the right people in place that allow us to begin tackling these big challenges head on.

IPS: Given the uniqueness of your nomination at this time in history, there are a lot of expectations from people about what you should do if elected in November. Do you see it as a burden or is it fair for people to expect so much out of your candidacy?

BO: Actually, I think expectations are high because people don’t believe their government has served them well over the past eight years, and they appreciate what it is like when government is working as it was under President [Bill] Clinton. I can’t view this charge as a burden because I chose to run for president, but I do appreciate this unique moment in history. From that standpoint, my main charge is to continue to acknowledge those who paved the way and to honour their work by always doing my very best. Anything less is unacceptable.

IPS: What role would former vice president Al Gore play in an Obama administration, since you’ve harped on global warming on the campaign trail?

BO: We would be honoured to have his support and expertise on a wide range of issues including fighting the causes of global warming and protecting the environment.

IPS: With the thousands that showed up at the party convention in Denver, are you confident that the Democratic troops are united behind you for November?

BO: I believe the Democratic Party is more united than it has ever been, and we are all dedicated to winning in November. We continue to welcome anyone who wants to join our cause to restore hope for our country and bring about the change we need in Washington.

Barack Obama. Credit: Bankole Thompson/IPS