The writer had the opportunity of observing the debate for nomination by the party, primaries and the election on 4th November, 2008. The article is based on his observation of the process as a disinterested and ordinary visitor to USA.
Barack Obama won by 349 Electoral College vote to 162 for John McCain, and 53% popular votes to 46% to McCain. The turnout was high - more than 133 million or 62% - up from 60% in 2004. The turnout compares well with that in 1968 when 63% voters cast vote and Lyndon Johnson won the election a year after assassination of John Kennedy. Obama received support from across the countries and ethnic /cultural communities. [CNN/ Election.com & US Today, November 6, 2008]
Republicans as Mavericks
McCain ran a very difficult campaign: he is a Republican candidate and at the same time had to dissociate himself from President George W. Bush. McCain-Palin campaign's slogan was that they are 'the Mavericks' which meant that they were a different breed of Republicans. Bush had become a liability for the Republican Party.
McCain claimed that he was a better candidate because he had longer experience in foreign policy and security than Obama. His claim is based on his experience as a pilot in US Navy and his long service as a Senator.
During the Cuban missile crisis early in Kennedy Administration, he was in the cockpit anxiously waiting for orders. In Vietnam he spent most of the time as a prisoner of war, having been shot down. He declined the Vietcong offer to release him, a concession to son and grandson of Admirals, preferring to serve with the other prisoners.
These are, for sure, nobility of character but hardly the situations that the US President falls into or deals with.
McCain had been a Senator much longer than Obama but held no executive position. Obama had been a State Senator in Illinois and was doing his first term in the US Senate. Joe Biden's experience as Senator matches McCain's.
McCain is widely considered as a man of honour. He differed with President Bush on tortures on the prisoners in Guantonamo, but supported Bush whole hearted on Iraq and Afghanistan. On economic policy, Obama pointed out, he had voted with Bush 90% of the time.
Sarah Palin's short shine
The choice of Sarah Palin as Vice Presidential running mate brought enormous energy to McCain campaign. She had the highest rating of all State Governors of USA (>90%) but was little known outside Alaska. She represented the core conservative values. Sarah Palin paled too soon.
She believed that the vice president's role is to influence congressional decisions, which is unexceptionable contradiction of the doctrine of separation of powers embedded in the US Constitution. Vice President is part of the executive branch of government, not legislative.
She could not name the newspapers she read or some landmark judgments of the Supreme Court. She felt confident about her competence in national security and foreign policy because Putin has to fly over Alaska's air space to enter USA. (Russia had sold Alaska to USA.)
McCain's age and history of health made it probable that Sarah Palin might have to assume presidency. She fell far below the mark.
Focus on foreign policy & globalized national security
The focus of McCain Campaign was foreign policy and national security which are connected and encompass the security of the whole world. He had little to offer which is not essentially Bush doctrine: USA's unilateral choice and global hegemony more by military might and less by diplomacy and consensus.
He spoke eloquently of the success of Bush policy of 'surge' in Iraq, i.e. escalating level of troop deployment. He favoured a tough approach to Iran (also other countries) which tries to develop nuclear capability and harbours Taliban / Laden brand fundamentalists.
McCain criticized Obama's stance on national security, which is less hawkish. Obama is prepared to talk to the axis-of-evil countries without pre-conditions. Obama clarified that diplomatic preparations precede summit level talks - it is presumed. McCain's understanding seems too literal.
Several former Secretaries of State, including some who had served Republican Presidents, supported Obama's approach. Their political endorsement followed party lines except that of Colin Powell, who endorsed Obama.
Economic recovery plan, tax reform & government expenditure
McCain lacked a clear view of the economy and a plan for economic recovery. Even when the economic crisis hit, he continued to repeat that the economic fundamentals were strong. Later, he explained that by fundamentals he meant the quality of the American workers - they are the best in the world. New economic texts are to be written before his view gets respectability.
He suspended the campaign and went to Washington to get the economic recovery package - then called bail-out - passed by the Congress. Presumably he had little to say instantaneously and visit to Washington could be an alibi. His campaign eventually acknowledged that he would loose support if he focused too much on the economy.
Obama had focused on the economy as the main electoral issue and had a policy for economic recovery. The debt burden was excessive, particularly on the middle and small business and middle and low income groups. The cost of insurance and college education was too high which most could not afford. Unemployment was high and rising.
He proposed large investment in infrastructures which creates jobs; $ 150 billion over ten years for securing energy independence with focus on renewable and environment-friendly technology; and the overriding need for public policy to revivify the economy.
His tax plan proposed some increase for the large corporations and the high income brackets ($ 0.25 million annually), tax break for small and medium enterprises for attracting industries back home, tax relief for the middle and low income groups, and health insurance for workers funded by employer.
Obama's scheme dents into corporate profit and bonus to the executives, luxury of the wealthy, and comfort of the very rich.
Obama's plan delivers benefit to the middle and small business as well as the middle and low income groups who constitute 95% of the electorate. Most importantly, it empowers them economically and thereby attenuates income inequality which impinges political equality. He recognizes the role of government in economy and provision of welfare. It is rooted in the liberal social philosophy.
McCain's tax plan proposed reduction for the large corporations and tax credit for health insurance for the middle and low income groups. It assumes that prosperity would be generated by the rich and benefits would trickle down to the others. He is against large government and expansion of social welfare programmes. His policy is rooted in libertarian or conservative social philosophy.
McCain pointed out that fiscal deficit would result if Obama cut tax and simultaneously pursue the economic and social programmes. There would be fiscal deficit but not as scary as he would have people believe. Given the rising trend of unemployment, fiscal expansion within prudent limits wins the bet.
Cut of aid budget would help a bit but not much. US aid budget includes military aid also which exceeds development and humanitarian aid. Higher revenue from growth also will finance a large part of the expenditure.
Pullout from Iraq would generate savings. Iraq war costs $ 10 billion a month. When pullout is completed over eighteen months as planned, annual saving would amount to $ 120 billion.
There is a choice between butter and gun, and gun yields to butter in Obama policy.
Negative campaign, racial prejudice, disinformation
Obama was subjected to negative campaign based on disinformation and racial prejudice. In McCain campaign rallies, he was introduced as Barack Hosain with emphasis on the middle name insinuating he was a Muslim or connected with the Muslim fundamentalists. There were boos such as 'terrorist' and 'kill him'.
Obama's father came from Kenya and studied at universities in USA, including Harvard. His mother was white and he grew up with his 'white grand parents'. An undergraduate of Columbia University and doctor of jurisprudence (JD) of Harvard University, he is one of the best educated Americans and most educated Presidents.
The negative campaign and disinformation came under criticism. In one rally, he had to say that Obama is a decent American with whom he was competing for US President. McCain tried to distance himself from the disinformation but could not fully stem the tide or acquit himself of the responsibility for name-calling.
Another stream of negative campaign accused Obama of being a promoter welfare state, socialist, even and Marxist. These reflect the popular or vulgarized notions of economic and social philosophy. His economic plan has elements of human welfare indeed, but arguably not socialism and definitely not Marxism.
The economic rescue package acquires partial ownership for government because it injected capital to save the collapsing business organizations and the share market. It was not by choice but by default of the greedy Wall Street executives. And the programme was initiated by Bush administration, though substantially modified by the Congress.
Criticism of Obama was often based on inadequate understanding of the subtle points he made. In a radio interview given in 2001 he had observed that the Civil Rights Movement was centered on the court and, as a result, secured negative rights but missed out on political rights. It was cited as a proof that he wanted to establish a redistributive regime - euphemism for socialism or vulgarized Marxism.
History of human rights proves his point. The negative rights - e.g. security of life, property, contractual obligations - are recognized by all constitutional and legal systems barring a few communist or dictatorial regimes. The positive rights are yet to get universal legal sanction.
Mill conceptualized the negative rights and Sir Isaiah Berlin the distinction. It is not Marx or Engels.
Paradigm shifts in domestic policy and global order
Obama Administration will have to deal with some very urgent and complex issues early on. In the first place, the economy has to be revivified, the trend of unemployment reversed, and creation of jobs on a large scale has to be accelerated.
This would require both fiscal stimulation and softening of monetary policy, which have already commenced. A period of negative interest may emerge. Some inflation is expected; the Administration can rightly claim credit if it can contain the speed and the rate.
There may be some retreat from free trade and immigration policy may tighten a bit in order to protect jobs to the Americans. Obama has already hinted that the free trade agreements would be renegotiated, focusing on stricter enforcement of labour and environmental standards.
The world economy is in shambles and needs urgent attention. The countries which have surplus foreign assets - held in US dollar mostly - will be called upon to make significant contributions to the programme.
They may strike a hard bargain to win stronger influence on the world economy, which will slow down the process but not stall it. There is a collective interest in salvaging the US economy with which the world economy is linked.
Pullout from Iraq will be quite difficult task, given the sectarian conflict. Pullout is a compulsion of domestic policy, however. Too many young men - women also who join the army - have returned as dead soldiers!
Stepping up pressure on Afghanistan also will be difficult, given the weakness of Karzai government, the mountainous borders with Pakistan and its elected government standing on a fragile compromise with Nawaz Sarif's party and the armed forces.
Obama received support from all across the country and the ethnic / cultural communities - ethnicity and culture largely overlap. The much feared Bradley effect did not occur - the voters did not act from racial prejudices.
His massive electoral mobilization has achieved fusion of the Americans into one nation, obliterating the ethnic / cultural boundaries. Efforts need to be sustained so that the fusion gets deeper and immutable. The conservative counter-reaction should not be ignored.
Media & the election
The media played a critical role in conducting campaign and, more importantly, voter education. Those who engaged in campaign played up the strength of their candidate, debunked negative campaign and provided better information.
The impartial media provided balanced information and policy analysis, pointing out exaggerated claims or unjust criticism.
Opinion polls and their regular updates indicated how the margin of support was shifting between the candidates. The projected magnitudes were sometimes slightly off the mark, but not the direction.
The media covered for nearly two years the election process beginning with the competition among the candidates to get party's nomination and finishing with the election on 4th November. By the time the voters went to the boot, they knew enough about the candidates and their policies.
Adequate access to independent information and analysis is an important condition for democratic election. It is a public or community responsibility.
Impact on Bangladesh
The impact on Bangladesh will follow from USA's global and regional policy, not being an area of priority. In the first place, export of consumer products will benefit from the expansion of US economy and its simulative effect on the rest of the world. The renewed emphasis on labour and environmental standards will call for more attention.
USA has an interest in restoration of a constitutional democratic government in Bangladesh. Back in July this year, Joe Biden, then Chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, was 'surprised' that the dates for election had not been fixed. [Daily Star, 27 July, 2008] The Vice President is expected to have an important role in foreign policy.
There is a great deal of instability in the region. Bangladesh, Nepal and Pakistan have fragile governments and weak democratic roots. Sri Lanka's ethnic / regional conflict has been in stalemate far too long. The government in India is a coalition of regional parties held together by commitment to core democratic values and structures which weather occasional communal and regional separatist violence.
The region has also the largest concentration of poverty. It can hardly afford a further dose of communalism, regional disharmony and inequality if it were to remove poverty and attain respectable growth.
As the USA's security pressure intensifies in Afghanistan, the al-Quaeda / Laden / Taliban fundamentalists will seek new safe havens and unconstitutional or undemocratic government sympathetic to the fundamentalist cause will prove to be attractive sanctuary. An elected government in Bangladesh whose constitutional legitimacy is above board will be best consistent with US's global security policy
Conclusion:
The success of Obama has generated new hopes across the world. The jubilation will not produce durable result unless there is the willingness to share the responsibility and the burden for success of the transformative leadership. His success is only the beginning of the transformation, not the end.
(Dr. Masihur Rahman is a former civil servant and a noted commentator on contemporary issues) |