Obama camp in panic as ‘Xena’ Sarah Palin scythes through support
Sarah Baxter, The Sunday Times, 14 September 2008

Palinmania has washed away the Democrat’s lead in key states

Washington -- THE high-heeled, moose-hunting governor of Alaska has sent Barack Obama’s campaign into a state of panic as support for the Democratic presidential candidate haemorrhages in the battleground states he must win to reach the White House.

Sarah Palin, 44, continued to scythe through Obama’s support among women by taunting the first potential black president for declining to choose Hillary Clinton as his running mate and by declaring that questions about juggling work and family were “kind of irrelevant” in the modern age.

The mother of five, who has been called Xena, the warrior princess, said in a television interview: “I think he’s regretting not picking [Clinton] now, I do. What determination and grit and even grace through some tough shots that were fired her way - she handled those well,” Palin said.

She presented herself as a champion of no-fuss, no-non-sense working mothers. “Of course you can be the vice-presi-dent and you can raise a family,” she said brightly. “I’m the governor and I’m raising a family.”

In the face of Palin's onslaught, Obama has continued to base his campaign on the outdated claim that John McCain and his running mate represent four more years of a failed Bush administration.

A senior Obama adviser said candidly that claim did not work. “I don’t think it’s sticking. The McCain campaign has stolen our message of ‘change’ - the very thing we’ve been campaigning on for 20 months. Well, who’s the change? It’s McCain.” Palin’s astounding rise has left the Obama camp floundering for a new narrative that will capture the imagination of voters in the run-up to the November 4 election. “There is overreaction and panic,” the official admitted. “The hard part for Barack is she’s stolen his thunder a bit. It has knocked us off our game.”

In a series of interviews with ABC, Palin brushed aside charges that she had changed her mind about a notoriously expensive “Bridge to Nowhere” in Alaska and distorted her record of seeking congressional subsidies for her home state. The only “gotcha” moment came when she was at a loss to understand the concept of the Bush doctrine, defined by Charles Gibson, the interviewer, as the right to self-defence by taking preemptive action against terrorists. Gibson, however, has run into criticism from conservatives for patronising Palin over a doctrine whose definition has changed and is not widely recognised outside the world of Washington foreign policy analysts.

Obama’s adviser said the attacks had misfired. “At the end of the day, women are sick of men running everything. They’re thinking, ‘Enough already.’ It has nothing to do with what she stands for. Our mistake was thinking women had nowhere else to go.”

The Democrat cheers that greeted the selection of veteran senator Joe Biden, 65, the chairman of the Senate foreign relations committee, as Obama’s running mate have died away.

“If we had picked Hillary Clinton, we would have saved ourselves three months of anguish over the summer,” the official said. “If we had spent the time unifying the party, we’d be in a totally different place. I’m not sure McCain would have picked Palin if Hillary was VP.”

Palinmania has washed away Obama’s polling leads in several swing states that he had been counting on to win.

A clutch of polls last week showed McCain ahead by five points in Missouri, four in Ohio, four in Virginia and eight in Florida. New Mexico and N e v a d a , t w o t o p O b a m a targets, recorded narrow leads for McCain. Other states that had appeared to be comfortably in the Democratic camp now look precarious. In blue-collar New Jersey, Obama’s lead has shrunk to three points; in latte-sipping Washing-ton, it is down to two.

He is still narrowly ahead in Colorado and Michigan, where Palin has been campaigning energetically, but the ground is shifting beneath his feet. Advisers fear the get-out-the-vote machine that served Obama so well in the primary campaign against Clinton will be overwhelmed by Palin’s legion of female fans. “Are we running a primary campaign in a general election?” the adviser wondered. “Our campaign has an unbelievable ground game. It’s far superior to McCain’s but at the end of the day, people vote on emotion. Do I like you? Do I trust you? Do you care about me?”

A poll by the Associated Press last week showed that white women preferred McCain to Obama by 53% to 40%.

“People still don’t know what Obama stands for. There’s a perceived elitism and something aloof about him. They just don’t connect with him,” the adviser added. “As a person, Palin is very intriguing. She’s attractive and funny and she’s a hell of a speaker. There’s an element of ‘she’s like us’.”

It is all the more galling for Obama’s supporters that Palin has been in the news for little more than a fortnight. Voters told pollsters last summer that they had heard too much about Obama but they cannot get enough of Palin for now.

She remains a high-risk choice for McCain, who has been overshadowed by Palin’s role as “campaigner-in-chief”. The crowds melted away for McCain’s first solo appearance without her last week at a Pennsylvania diner where he was heckled by Obama supporters.

There is still much to learn about the Alaska governor before voters go to the polls. Investigators in her home state are seeking to subpoena Todd Palin, her husband, for his alleged role in Troopergate - a dispute over the alleged dismissal of a police chief for refusing to sack Palin’s former brother-in-law, a state trooper who had fallen out with her family.

The tabloid National Enquirer, basking in new-found credibility after it exposed the former White House candidate John Edwards as an adulterer, claimed in its latest issue that Palin’s 19-year-old son Track was a regular drug abuser who was packed off to the army to clean up. His unit deployed to Iraq last week on the anniversary of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

The Obama campaign expects support for Palin to subside. It takes comfort from memories of the collapse of Clinton, who was leading by double-digits in the polls when she mishandled a question about driving licences for immigrants. Her standing plummeted.

However, there is little time for voter disillusion to set in. Palin’s working-class, Wal-Mart-mom appeal and moving life story are insulating her from attack.

Her decision to raise Trig, a Down’s syndrome baby, and support for her pregnant 17-year-old daughter Bristol have been widely praised.

At a rally attended by 23,000 supporters in Fairfax, Virginia, last week, Jayne Young, 57, a registered independent, said: “My heart goes out to her family. I liked what she said about being ‘just an average American family’. You can be one of those übermoms and on your kids 100% of the time and they still go off the rails.”

Katherine Hoppe, 65, was wearing a T-shirt emblazoned with the slogan “Another Democrat for McCain”. She worked as a volunteer at Hillary Clinton’s headquarters in Ballston, Virginia, and was present at her concession speech to Obama.

“I felt horrible,” she said. “When McCain announced that he had picked Palin, I went crazy. When you’re my age and Hillary’s, you want to give to the next generation. Hillary did that. She gave us Sarah.”

Clinton is said by friends to be “gutted” that she put 18m cracks in the glass ceiling for women only to have Palin kick in the pane. But she is thought to share Palin’s conviction that the media are treating the Alaskan governor unfairly.

Mark Penn, Clinton’s former chief strategist, said: “The media is doing the kinds of stories on Palin that they’re not doing on the other candidates. People are going to conclude that they’re giving her a rougher time. This is an election in which the voters are going to decide for themselves.”

Some conservatives are concerned that Republicans are overplaying the sexist card. Earlier this year, Palin accused Clinton of “whining” about the attacks on her, but the McCain camp worked itself into an even greater lather last week over Obama’s comments about “putting lipstick on a pig” - regarded as an insult to their “pitbull in lipstick”.

Ramesh Ponnuru, an editor with the conservative journal National Review, complained: “The Republicans are coming across as whiny grievance-mon-gers. Don’t they realise that this harping on ambiguous slights is what people hate about political correctness? It was bad enough when liberals were trying to destroy Palin. Now Republicans are trashing her brand. They’re undermining her appeal as a different, tougher kind of female politician.”

After repeated jabs from McCain, including the false charge that Obama supported sex education for kinder-garteners, the Illinois senator hit back with a negative advertisement mocking his 72-year-old rival for being out of date and out of touch with computer technology, including e-mail.

It backfired when it emerged that McCain was unable to type because he was injured as a prisoner of war in Vietnam.

The Obama adviser said the Democratic candidate should remain true to himself. “He has to be who he is. When he was totally himself, he was doing so well. He should keep at the things he cares about instead of having people turn him into a pretzel.”

'She's one of us': Palin wins over Obama women
The Times, 13 September 2008

Women who said that they intended to vote for the Democrats are turning towards Sarah Palin

Women who said that they intended to vote for the Democrats are turning towards Sarah Palin, despite predictions that they would be alienated by her strong opposition to abortion

Jessica Goral had pretty much made up her mind two weeks ago: she was going to vote for Barack Obama. Then John McCain picked Sarah Palin as his running-mate.

“She empowers a lot of women,” said Mrs Goral, a mother of two in Macomb County – a national bellwether in the battleground state of Michigan and an area rich in white, working-class swing voters who will play an important role in deciding the election in November.

“I like that she’s a brand new mother, and that she has the courage to stand behind her pregnant daughter. She relates to working women. For all of us who have children at home but have to go to work every day – she has given us a sense that we can still do it and can be an excellent mum,” she said. “Sarah Palin is a role model. She’s made me more likely to vote Republican.”

If Mr Obama should be in any doubt how gravely the vice-presidential nomination of the Governor of Alaska has imperilled his White House ambitions, then a day spent in Macomb County will make this clear: white women who voted for John Kerry in 2004 are suddenly deserting the Democratic Party.

This is Mount Clemens, in the heart of Macomb County, where the pollster Stan Greenberg first identified the phenomenon of the Reagan Democrats – the working-class, socially conservative, traditionally Democratic whites who deserted the party for Ronald Reagan in 1980. It is fair to say that this critical swing group now has a new name: Palin Democrats.

The Times spoke to dozens of women here – perhaps the key demographic in this election – in an area that is 88 per cent white, has one of the highest unemployment and home repossession rates in the country, and will play a big role in determining who wins Michigan in November. It is a crucial swing state that no Republican has won since 1988 but where Mr Obama is particularly vulnerable. Nearly all said that they were still undecided. Yet the disturbing fact for Mr Obama was how many said that they had been leaning towards him – until Mrs Palin entered the race. It lends new credence to a poll last week that showed white women fleeing from Mr Obama to Mr McCain.

Katherine Herman, 45, is a lifelong Democrat who has never voted for a Republican. Until now. “I have a friend who’s a Democrat, and like me, it’s Sarah Palin that’s caused her to lean in favour of McCain. Palin is tenacious. She’s sure of herself and would make good decisions for all Americans,” she said.

Stephanie Parker, 23, a single mother puffing on a Marlboro menthol cigarette in Main Street, Mount Clemens, voted for Mr Kerry and had been drawn to Mr Obama. “Palin’s made a big difference. I think she’ll do us great. What she stands for is fantastic,” she said. What does she stand for? “I couldn’t tell really. But I love her.”

Jennifer Zvara, 22, another single mother who voted for John Kerry, said: “I’m undecided but leaning more towards McCain because of Palin. It’s a women thing. She’s one of us. This race is about the running-mates – it’s not about Obama any more.”

Aides to Mr Obama have argued that the conservatism of Mrs Palin – her opposition to abortion even in cases of rape and incest – will alienate women. Yet the women who spoke toThe Timessaid that while they were concerned about those views they were willing to overlook them.

In recent presidential races pollsters have striven to name the preeminent voter swing group that they believe will decide the election. White women were always considered pivotal in a close election.

In 1996 it was “soccer moms” whom Bill Clinton targeted. In 2004 it was “security moms” who helped President Bush to win reelection. This year the group watched most closely by pollsters has been named the “Wal-Mart moms” – the white every-woman, juggling work and children, who wants a Democrat in the White House but is not yet sold on Mr Obama. In Mrs Palin they have found a soulmate.

Tammy Pore, 31, leaving Wal-Mart with one of her two children, said that she had decided to vote for Mr Obama. She said that she was leaning towards Mr McCain. “I think Sarah Palin is a great choice. There are some of us who have certain worries about Obama’s faith. I wouldn’t say he’s not a Christian – but maybe he just has a different belief.” Another young mother, who did not want to be named, simply said: “I’m a Republican. But I would have voted for Obama if he’d picked Hillary. We really want a woman in the White House.”

Last month, before Mrs Palin was picked by Mr McCain, Mr Greenberg returned to Macomb County. He conducted six focus groups. “Obama has yet to close the deal with white, working-class voters who normally vote Democrat,” Mr Greenberg said. Macomb’s Reagan Democrats were “refusing to dismiss their worst fears – that he does not love America or even might harbour a secret agenda”. Mrs Palin is giving them all the more reason to reject Mr Obama.

Posted by: Claurila at September 15, 2008 10:55 PM

http://www.menapress.com/article.php?sid=2154
Elections américaines : la Harley Davidson et le vélo
Par Laurent Murawiec, Metula News Agency info # 011509/8, 15 septembre 2008

Washington -- C’est la saison des ouragans aux Etats-Unis ; venus de l’Atlantique, Gustav, Hanna, Ike dévastent les côtes. L’image a fait florès ici, un autre ouragan est en train de bouleverser le paysage politique américain, c’est Sarah Palin, gouverneur de l’Alaska, colistière choisie par John McCain. Sa nomination a pris le pays d’assaut, elle a assommé le microcosme politico-médiatique, elle a galvanisé non seulement la base du parti républicain, mais au-delà. Elle a changé la nature du « ticket » Républicain, élargi son audience et sa base, et changé de fond en comble la dynamique de la campagne des présidentielles. Pour une femme politique hier encore peu connue, le bilan de deux semaines de présence est impressionnant.

Que se passe-t-il pour que McCain, hier légèrement à la traîne d’Obama dans les sondages, soit passé en tête, au point de voir la victoire se dessiner à l’horizon du mois de novembre ? A cela on peut voir plusieurs raisons qui se renforcent les unes les autres.

Primo, la candidate elle-même. Son discours à la Convention Républicaine a été un petit chef d’œuvre, mêlant une biographie personnelle à la fois forte et émouvante, une profession de foi de l’Amérique profonde, celle qui travaille, ne prend pas la pose, chasse, pèche, fait des enfants, va à l’Eglise le dimanche, et est fière de l’Amérique.

C’est l’Amérique que ne montre pas Hollywood, qui n’intéresse pas les grandes chaînes de télévision. C’est l’Amérique dont Obama disait avec mépris qu’ « elle se crispe sur ses fusils et sa religion ». Incisive, drôle et sans complexe, Palin a proclamé ses valeurs avec chaleur et force, provoquant l’enthousiasme d’une foule Républicaine jusque là un peu en deçà. McCain lui-même, ravi de son coup de maître, en sort revigoré, comme si l’énergie débordante de sa colistière lui était injectée.

Obama a flanché : le candidat du « changement » a choisi pour colistier un cheval de retour de l’establishment washingtonien. Le bavard sénateur Joe Biden, qui avait recueilli quelques misérables milliers de voix aux premières primaires, avant de tirer bien vite sa révérence. Il est pensionnaire du Sénat depuis une trentaine d’années, ce qui détone dans le paysage du « changement ».

Obama n’a pas eu cette « audace de l’espoir » dont il se gargarise : il aurait pu choisir Hillary Clinton, lestée des 18 millions de voix reçues au cours des primaires. Il n’a pas osé un ticket « noir/femme », qui aurait constitué une très grande première. Il lui en coûte aujourd’hui. Sa candidature, fondée et lancée sur le vedettariat, a perdu le devant de la scène et les projecteurs en folie. Lui qui paradait à la Convention Démocrate devant un temple grec en carton-pâte a dû céder l’avant-scène à cette novice apparente qu’est Sarah Palin, qui lui ravit la vedette.

La différence éclate avec deux clichés qui circulent ensemble sur le Net, et qui font rigoler l’Amérique. La première montre Sarah Palin, basketteuse émérite (surnommée « Sarah barracuda »), reine de beauté, provinciale fière, politicienne de choc – montée sur une Harley Davidson.

L’autre photo nous montre un Obama-bobo, gentil vélocipédiste urbain, incarnation d’une Amérique verte, politiquement correcte.

Sarah Palin a des positions tranchées en matière nationale : elle s’oppose vigoureusement à l’avortement, à tout prix prôné par la gauche ; elle est membre de la National Rifle Association, qui milite pour le respect du droit constitutionnel des citoyens à porter des armes ; elle s’oppose à la corruption washingtonienne qui permet aux élus de faire passer en douce, dans les lois qu’ils votent, des subventions qui vont à toutes sortes de projets dans leurs circonscriptions – il y en pour des centaines de milliards de dollars.

Pour reprendre une expression, qui n’avait pas vraiment eu son heure de gloire en France, elle est, sans forfanterie, « droit dans ses bottes ». C’est le pays réel des cols bleus, des fermiers et de la middle class qui se reconnaît en elle.

Dans son art oratoire sans apprêts ni chichis, le courant passe. Il passe si bien que les meetings et rallies auxquels elle participe reçoivent le double ou le quadruple des foules attendues. En un mot, Palin est en prise sur le pays comme bien peu d’hommes politique l’ont été – comme un Reagan, peut-être. Palin est « féministe » sans être une de ces prétentieuses pleurnicheuses qui se posent éternellement en victimes, ni de ces idéologues abstruses et fanatiques, qui encombrent les campus. L’image de la femme pionnière de l’Ouest et du Grand Nord est bien la sienne, chasseuse de caribou, et celle de « Rosy la Riveteuse », célèbre image de la deuxième guerre mondiale, qui montrait une ouvrière soudeuse faisant le boulot d’un homme.

Rude concurrence pour le ticket démocrate – lequel en a perdu la tête et les pédales. L’apparition de Sarah Palin a fait l’effet d’une bombe dans le camp d’Obama, qui vient de passer deux semaines à essayer – en vain – d’en prendre la mesure. Et, tout aussi vainement, de démanteler la statue qui s’est spontanément formée dans l’esprit de l’électorat.

Mémoire d’analyste, je n’avais jamais été témoin d’un tel déversement de fiel, d’un tel déferlement de bile, d’un tel torrent de venin. Tout y est passé : la presse et la blogosphère de gauche n’ont rien épargné dans l’abjection ; Palin n’était pas la mère mais la grand-mère de son fils de cinq mois, qui est mongolien ; c’était le fils de sa fille, laquelle est enceinte de 5 mois ; les mensonges dégoulinaient de tous côtés, accusant le gouverneur de l’Alaska d’être une pedzouille ignare, d’avoir pour toute expérience la mairie d’un bourg de 9 000 habitants, d’être raciste et « nazie ». D’être une fondamentaliste chrétienne extrémiste. Avec son mari pèquenot, qu’allait-elle se mêler de politique avec ses cinq mouflets ?

J’ai vu l’hystérie de Républicains emportés par leur haine de Clinton, et l’insanité de la gauche dans sa détestation de Bush. Mais je n’ai rien vu qui approche ce raz-de-marée d’amertume et de vindicte sortant des égouts et des poubelles.

Pour la grande presse et les télévisions, - dont les journalistes sont Démocrates à 5 ou 6 contre un ! - « le peuple » est une abstraction que l’on invoque, mais dont la réalité est obèse, ignare et a l’esprit étroit. Ceux qui arborent le drapeau insistent pour garder leurs armes à feu, ceux qui tuent les « bons beatniks » dans Easy Rider et autres films sixties, ceux qui n’étaient pas à Woodstock, ne fument pas d’herbe et – on atteint là le summum de l’incompréhensible – vont à l’église ou au temple.

Dans le monde enchanté de la gauche caviar, ces pratiques et croyances sont interdites, sous peine d’ostracisme et de mépris. C’est que cette engeance vit dans sa bulle où elle ne rencontre que ses pairs et ne débat que ses propres opinions. Comme le disait la journaliste vedette de la chaîne d’info continue câblée MNSBC, Andrea Mitchell, l’une des stars du paysage médiatique : « Il n’y a que les analphabètes qui voteront pour Palin ». Le monde hors la bulle n’existe pas.

Et s’il prétend exister, et, pire, prendre la parole, et être candidat à la vice-présidence, la haine viscérale ne se contient plus, elle fait éruption et tire sur tout ce qui bouge.

L’hystérie irrépressible des media de gauche a pour effet direct de renforcer l’intérêt que porte l’électorat au ticket McCain-Palin. Le fanatisme despotique qui veut interdire tout ce qui ne lui ressemble pas révulse des millions d’électeurs, y compris les démocrates centristes, les électeurs qui ont voté pour Hillary Clinton. Obama, dont l’entourage ne s’est pas privé d’attiser les flammes, ou d’ouvrir les poubelles, vient, à cet effet, d’envoyer une équipe de trente avocats et enquêteurs en Alaska pour trouver et au besoin créer des « scandales » affectant Palin.

Les media sont le principal soutien d’Obama, il est leur candidat, leur chéri, leur création. Mais ses succès l’ont grisé. Tout comme Hillary Clinton se voyait jadis en candidate légitime et unique, sûre de sa nomination, Obama s’est comporté pendant l’été comme s’il était déjà président, se donnant le ridicule de se dessiner un Grand Sceau, négligeant de faire campagne là où il en a le plus besoin, multipliant les déclarations grandiloquentes et creuses, et les gaffes. Résultat : le chroniqueur vedette du très libéral New York Times, Tom Friedman, assène : Obama est passé de cool à cold, (il était cool il est devenu froid) : pas bon pour l’idole des jeunes. L’adulation lui est montée à la tête.

« Les Démocrates sont pleins de prémonitions lugubres et de peur de l’avenir » - doom and gloom - (malheur et tristesse), affirme John Podesta, l’un des barons du Clintonisme – on en est au point où les Républicains mènent dans les intentions de vote pour les élections aux Congrès.

Il y a six mois, les Démocrates avaient dix ou quinze longueurs d’avance. Les récriminations se multiplient dans le camp Démocrate ; on critique Obama et son équipe, on les accuse de n’être que des politiciens de la Côte Est, incapables de comprendre le reste du pays, sans parler de le conquérir.

Les Clintoniens sont encore pleins de ressentiment à l’encontre d’Obama, pour avoir détrôné la Sainte famille et snobé Hillary pour la vice-présidence. L’incapacité de la campagne Obama à définir un angle d’attaque contre Pali, qui leur file entre les doigts, est également cause de récriminations. Obama lui-même sacrifie ses prétentions d’être porteur d’une « nouvelle politique », qui soit « post-partisane » et au-dessus de la mêlée : sa campagne tire à boulets rouges sur McCain et Palin, et pas de la façon la plus ragoûtante qui soit. Les œufs pourris volent bas.

En un mot, formidable montée en puissance de McCain-Palin, stagnation et doute pour Obama, peur des Démocrates que les premiers ne deviennent les locomotives d’une reconquête Républicaine des chambres du Congrès.

Le retournement est violent. Pendant que les électeurs indépendants (non-affiliés aux deux grands partis) se tournent massivement vers McCain, les remous qui agitent la gauche se font de plus en plus sentir. Les deux présentateurs les plus enragés de la chaîne MSNBC, Chris Matthews et Ken Olberman, viennent tout juste d’être rétrogradés par la direction de l’information : non seulement traînent-ils lamentablement dans la chasse à l’audience, ce qui n’est pas nouveau, mais ils se sont discrédités par leur adoration béate d’Obama, encensé tel un dieu, et la hargne manifestée à l’égard de McCain et surtout de Palin. Ces signes des temps ne trompent pas : l’Obamacratie est sur la défensive, le tandem du vieux guerrier McCain et de la jeune combattante Palin est à l’offensive.

La tendance est elle destinée à durer ? C’est mon avis : ce que Sarah Palin catalyse, ce n’est pas un désir de star system, c’est une foule nombreuse qui est du même ordre que la « majorité silencieuse » qui avait élu Richard Nixon en 1968 et 1972, Reagan en 1980 et 1984, et dont Bush avait profité en 2000 et 2004. McCain-Palin font revenir cette foule aux urnes, parce qu’elle perçoit, qu’avec Palin, elle a voix au chapitre, et que McCain, quelles que soient les réserves qui existent à son égard, est un décideur. L’affaire est-elle dans leur sac ? Les aléas de la campagne sont tels qu’on doit en douter, mais la dynamique enclenchée par le coup de maître tactique d’un McCain plus matois qu’on ne le pensait me semble devoir durer.

Posted by: Sebaneau at September 16, 2008 12:31 AM

http://www.nypost.com/seven/09152008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/obama_tried_to_stall_gis_iraq_withdrawal_129150.htm?page=0
OBAMA TRIED TO STALL GIS' IRAQ WITHDRAWAL
LONG VIEW: Barack Obama tours Iraq with Gen. David Petraeus in July, when he sought to stall any agreement for US troop withdrawal until President Bush left office.
LONG VIEW: Barack Obama tours Iraq with Gen. David Petraeus in July, when he sought to stall any agreement for US troop withdrawal until President Bush left office.

By AMIR TAHERI

New York Post, September 15, 2008

WHILE campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.

"He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington,"

Zebari said in an interview.

Obama insisted that Congress should be involved in negotiations on the status of US troops - and that it was in the interests of both sides not to have an agreement negotiated by the Bush administration in its "state of weakness and political confusion."

"However, as an Iraqi, I prefer to have a security agreement that regulates the activities of foreign troops, rather than keeping the matter open."

Zebari says.

Though Obama claims the US presence is "illegal," he suddenly remembered that Americans troops were in Iraq within the legal framework of a UN mandate. His advice was that, rather than reach an accord with the "weakened Bush administration," Iraq should seek an extension of the UN mandate.

While in Iraq, Obama also tried to persuade the US commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to suggest a "realistic withdrawal date." They declined.

Obama has made many contradictory statements with regard to Iraq. His latest position is that US combat troops should be out by 2010. Yet his effort to delay an agreement would make that withdrawal deadline impossible to meet.

Supposing he wins, Obama's administration wouldn't be fully operational before February - and naming a new ambassador to Baghdad and forming a new negotiation team might take longer still.

By then, Iraq will be in the throes of its own campaign season. Judging by the past two elections, forming a new coalition government may then take three months. So the Iraqi negotiating team might not be in place until next June.

Then, judging by how long the current talks have taken, restarting the process from scratch would leave the two sides needing at least six months to come up with a draft accord. That puts us at May 2010 for when the draft might be submitted to the Iraqi parliament - which might well need another six months to pass it into law.

Thus, the 2010 deadline fixed by Obama is a meaningless concept, thrown in as a sop to his anti-war base.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and the Bush administration have a more flexible timetable in mind.

According to Zebari, the envisaged time span is two or three years - departure in 2011 or 2012. That would let Iraq hold its next general election, the third since liberation, and resolve a number of domestic political issues.

Even then, the dates mentioned are only "notional," making the timing and the cadence of withdrawal conditional on realities on the ground as appreciated by both sides.

Iraqi leaders are divided over the US election. Iraqi President Jalal Talabani (whose party is a member of the Socialist International) sees Obama as "a man of the Left" - who, once elected, might change his opposition to Iraq's liberation. Indeed, say Talabani's advisers, a President Obama might be tempted to appropriate the victory that America has already won in Iraq by claiming that his intervention transformed failure into success.

Maliki's advisers have persuaded him that Obama will win - but the prime minister worries about the senator's "political debt to the anti-war lobby" - which is determined to transform Iraq into a disaster to prove that toppling Saddam Hussein was "the biggest strategic blunder in US history."

Other prominent Iraqi leaders, such as Vice President Adel Abdul-Mahdi and Kurdish regional President Massoud Barzani, believe that Sen. John McCain would show "a more realistic approach to Iraqi issues."

Obama has given Iraqis the impression that he doesn't want Iraq to appear anything like a success, let alone a victory, for America. The reason? He fears that the perception of US victory there might revive the Bush Doctrine of "pre-emptive" war - that is, removing a threat before it strikes at America.

Despite some usual equivocations on the subject, Obama rejects pre-emption as a legitimate form of self -defense. To be credible, his foreign-policy philosophy requires Iraq to be seen as a failure, a disaster, a quagmire, a pig with lipstick or any of the other apocalyptic adjectives used by the American defeat industry in the past five years.

Yet Iraq is doing much better than its friends hoped and its enemies feared. The UN mandate will be extended in December, and we may yet get an agreement on the status of forces before President Bush leaves the White House in January.

Posted by: Sebaneau at September 16, 2008 01:09 AM

Name:


Email Address:


URL:

Remember personal info?
YesNo
Comments:



Enter the code written above: