When President George W Bush II
shuffled off centre stage, dragging his dangling participles and poor
grammar behind him, he was a pathetic, crumpled figure.
Even his customary Texas bravado was
muted, and the contrived spring in his step was tired.
Historically the US’s worst
president, he departed the Oval office in a trail of destruction. His
legacy is indeed painful: the sinister but still unresolved
conspiracy of 9/11, one of the greatest wars in modern times against
an abstract noun called “terror” and the marginalisation of
international law.
Then there was the matter of global
financial meltdown due to his questionable financial policies. This
led to market greed and speculation on a scale never witnessed before
in human history. His administration’s massive tax breaks for the
wealthy, which did not see a trickle down of wealth as he naively
expected, created the US’s worst debt deficit in living memory.
But not only that; for under the
watchful eye of his vice-president and string-puller Dick Cheney –
a corporate vulture – he’d plundered Iraq, refused to sign the
Kyoto protocol, devastated Afghanistan, destabilised Pakistan,
ignored the Palestinians, hounded Iran, peddled Islamophobia and
presented the discredited idea of a “clash of civilisations” as a
fait accompli.
So it was no wonder that when Barack
Hussein Obama was sworn in as a Democratic president in 2008 after
nearly a decade of neo-con ignorance, imperious arrogance and
darkness, there was hope in the air.
Here was a man who had a command of the
English language and who appeared to understand the urgent issues at
play. The US, via the Bush regime, had become one of the world’s
most hated nations, particularly in the developing world and the
Middle East.
The worst affected by global warming,
the militarisation of international relations, neo-liberal economics
and the plundering of natural resources by the major powers, it has
always been their awareness that since 1967 US foreign policy has
been dominated by Israeli interests.
Obama had two challenges facing him:
firstly, the domestic situation and the economy, which was on the
brink of a melt-down, and secondly, US foreign policy with regards to
the “war on terror”, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran and Israel.
To be sure, Obama had an inbox from
hell. But he did start out bravely, his address in Cairo giving the
Muslim world hope. His undertakings to shut down Guantanamo Bay and
to gradually withdraw from Afghanistan and Iraq (where millions of
civilians have died) were also widely welcomed.
Unfortunately, the adage that the road
to hell is paved with good intentions applies to Obama. He not only
had to immediately make concessions to Zionists and conservatives in
appointing his administration, but he had to deal with a legislature
that was Republican, and destructively antagonistic towards him.
This is not to excuse Obama, but to
portray more the reality of his office, compromised from the start,
and hog-tied by reactionary Republicans – and a right-wing Tea
Party constituency that tried to make the case that he was a closet
Muslim.
However, his daunting presidential
challenges aside, the reality on the ground for most of the
communities affected by US policy, the direct delivery of Obama’s
pre-office promises have been inadequate. These were people who
needed relief and they are bitterly disappointed.
Guantanamo – that great moral wart –
still remains open, drones still terrorise Pakistan, Israel still
builds settlements with impunity, Israel still receives more US aid
than Africa and Asia combined, the US still has to acknowledge the
ICC, the US still has to lift the anachronistic Cuban embargo, carbon
reduction is minimal and covert militarisation, particularly in
Africa, continues.
This is what clouds President Obama’s
scheduled visit to South Africa, certainly not helped by the
DA-dominated Cape Town City Council slavishly awarding the US
president – the only person to have been awarded a Nobel Peace
prize for doing nothing – the freedom of the city.
These are just some of the issues that
have galvanised a very broad spectrum of local civic society
organisations from COSATU to the SACP to oppose Obama’s visit, the
Muslim Lawyer’s Association going so far as to seek a criminal
investigation against him based on the Stanford Report, the Rome
Statutes and the Geneva convention.
For the South African government,
Obama’s visit is a matter of development, economics and continental
security. According to President Zuma, who addressed the media, the
US is a major investor with 600 companies operating in the country.
Zuma also added that 90% of SA products entered the US market
duty-free.
According to economic commentators
Obama’s second African visit – also to Senegal and Tanzania –
is a belated effort to engage the continent against the background of
Chinese dominance. Africa is a rising giant, and as one of the
world’s most powerful industrial economies in spite of debt and
recession, the US can’t afford to miss the boat.
No comments:
Post a Comment