Why It Matters : Politics

The Arab World Gives Obama Poor Grades

Newsweek — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 20:29:22 GMT

By Seth Colter Walls

Back during campaign season, more than a few liberal talking heads predicted that Barack Obama’s international heritage could change America’s image abroad, were he to become president. This week’s insta-reaction from the Arab press suggests that the honeymoon might already be over where it is needed most urgently: in the Arab Middle East.

President Obama did what he could on his first day in office to try and shore up those conciliatory bona fides by placing a call to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abaas. But one look at the Arab press on Thursday morning revealed how thoroughly the recent Israel-Gaza conflict may have scuttled any potential ameliorating effect of an Obama presidency on anti-U.S. sentiment.

For example, the lead editorial in Thursday’s edition of Saudi Arabia’s pro-government Al-Watan daily was headlined “Obama’s intention to reconcile with the Islamic world is at stake.”

“Many observers maintain some hope of seeing the new master of the White House keeping his promises, even though we are aware of the pressures exerted by the Zionist conservative and left wing to uphold chaos and instability in the Middle East and around the world,” the paper wrote in an unsigned editorial. If that sounds a touch strident for an editorial greeting a new American president on his second full day in office, the next sentence doesn't let up: “The world will be unable to cooperate with Washington if it upholds the policy of the strong lord raising his club against all those who disagree with him or do not serve his interests.”

Keep in mind this is a Saudi daily, not a Syrian or Iranian one. In the regional proxy war between Iran and the U.S. for Arab hearts and minds, Saudi Arabia is doing whatever it can to shore up the Western-supported Fatah party led by Abbas in the West Bank, as he competes against the more militant strain of Palestinian politics represented by the Iran-backed Hamas party that rules Gaza. At this week’s Arab League summit, it was also Saudi Arabia that objected to a stronger denouncement of Israel’s actions in Gaza, while also staking out the relatively lonely position that its 2002-era peace plan—which calls for full recognition of Israel by Arab countries—is still on the table. (Though not for long, King Abdullah was forced to admit on Monday.)

That pessimism regarding Obama’s ability to bridge the Arab-Israeli divide was echoed in London’s Palestinian-owned Al-Quds al-Arabi on Thursday. In an opinion piece, the paper’s chief editor wrote that while Obama’s stated intention of building better relations with the Muslim world was a positive sign, such an outcome could only be secured by “lifting American military and diplomatic protection from the Israeli massacres and imposing Israeli respect of international pacts and UN resolutions.”

Indeed, if there’s one thing that Arabs and Israelis might be able to agree on today, it’s that skepticism is the proper attitude in response to any notion that an Obama presidency will perforce induce any positive developments in the Middle East. “I can tell you, anecdotally, from talking to regular people and working closely with the political leaders, there is a good deal of skepticism,” saidDahlia Scheindlin, a pollster and political strategist who is currently consulting for the small, left-wing Meretz party.“Regular people are worried he’ll look weak before the dreaded enemy of the Islamic world. Commentators wonder why he didn’t mention either Israel or Iran in his [recent] speeches. ... While people are generally pleased by Obama for America’s sake, the mood here is so dour regarding chances for peace, so cynical regarding our own politicians and so certain that there will be a resurgence of violence here sooner or later, that they can’t exactly remember to be excited about Obama for Israel’s sake. If you ask a regular Israeli whether Obama can change anything, he’s likely to say ‘we hope so,’ and roll his eyes wistfully,” she added. “They’ll be watching closely, but phone a call to Abbas doesn’t mean Abbas will magically regain the credibility among Palestinians to lead the Palestinian people to a peace accord. And Israelis are pragmatists—bordering on pessimists.” (Find out how the West Bank thinks of Obama in Newsweek Katie Paul's interview with Fatah advisor Diana Buttu.)

Still, pragmatism aside, a Kuwaiti editorial page noted on Thursday that there’s no specific cost associated with being optimistic, even as hopes for regional peace appear greatly diminished. “We do not have high hopes of Obama or his administration, especially when it comes to stopping the aggression of the Zionist entity on Palestine,” wrote a columnist in Thursday’s edition of the independent newspaper Al-Rai al-Aam, in an article headlined “We won’t lose anything if we feel optimistic.”

Left unanswered, however, is the implicit question regarding what, precisely, there is to be gained from unearned optimism. Any chance President Obama has for an Arab street honeymoon may depend on his ability to convince all parties involved to hope just a little bit longer as he settles into the job.

Crimes in the Time of Cholera

Katie Paul — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 22:19:40 GMT

Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe may be the only person left who denies that his country is spiraling out of control, but that hasn’t made it any easier to stop the mayhem. Tuesday, the U.N. reported that more than 2,000 people have perished in the cholera epidemic sweeping the country since August. Some 40,000 are infected, and the number of cases continues to rise exponentially. Worst of all, the complete collapse of the country’s basic infrastructure—water, sanitation, health care—has given rise to other diseases, including a particularly terrifying drug-resistant form of tuberculosis, which could easily turn an epidemic into a pandemic. Through it all, Mugabe has squandered aid money, chased out humanitarian groups, and suppressed information about the crisis.

That’s why U.S.-based group Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) upped the ante Tuesday, accusing Mugabe and his government of ‘crimes against humanity’ after collecting damning evidence on a fact-finding mission in December. They want the U.N. Security Council to see the health crisis as a threat to international peace and security, then swoop in and take over the health care system (with or without Mugabe’s blessing), and then refer the matter to the International Criminal Court for investigation. Fortunately for them, they have folks with serious street credit behind them—including Archbishop Desmond Tutu, former U.N. Chief Prosecutor Richard Goldstone, and former Irish President and OHCHR High Commissioner Mary Robinson.

The argument boils down to this: systematically denying people access to basic health care is not terribly different than holding guns to their heads. If so,they say, why not call upon the same international laws that are normally applied in conflict settings? The United Nations is then obliged to respond comparably in both scenarios—which means mobilizing an intervention akin to those dispatched to the war zones of Kosovo, Rwanda, Somalia, the former Yugoslavia, and Darfur. If the argument works, it would expand the paradigm for invoking international human rights law. Why? See Exhibit A: the definition of ‘crimes against humanity’ in the Rome Treaty, which established the ICC back in 1998. The key clauses are highlighted here:

Article 7: Crimes against humanity

For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means anyof the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack:
(a) Murder;
(b) Extermination;
(c) Enslavement;
(d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population;
(e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law;
(f) Torture;
(g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;
(h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious,gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;
(i) Enforced disappearance of persons;
(j) The crime of apartheid;
(k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.

What they would need to do is show that the actions—or lack thereof—that precipitated the health crises constitute an attack against the civilian population in and around Zimbabwe. In the chambers of the United Nations, that could be a tough sell. The only other time the Security Council has approached a health crisis as a threat to international security was back in 2000, when it issued a relatively mild statement of concern about the global AIDS epidemic. But signing off on a document filled with words like ‘requests,’‘encourages,’ and ‘interested Member States’ is a far cry from giving the United Nations the green light to take over a recalcitrant sovereign country’s health care system and put its leaders on trial.

Politically speaking, this is already an uphill battle. Naturally, Zimbabwe’s government is less than pleased, dismissing the group in characteristic anti-imperialist terms as a‘stupid, Western created organization.’ And the chances for success in leveling ICC charges against Mugabe and his thugs have more to do with politics in New York than in Harare. Even there, the PHR is up against the same familiar United Nations stalemate. An indignant China has long covered Mugabe’s back, despite years of damning evidence against him. Plus, the Security Council now has to contend with Uganda, which just took its place as a rotating member and pledged to back only the Southern African Development Community’s ~~impotent~~ ongoing negotiations.

But before you write off the PHR plan as hopeless idealism, consider this: though novel, their interpretation of international law is pure strategy. "The idea of ‘health’ is less politically charged," said Mary Robinson at a press gathering on Tuesday. "There are a lot of crises right now. The health prism is the way to get it into the Security Council and to get them to act on it." She has a point. No one has been able to take Mugabe down over shoddy elections, tortured journalists, or land seizures, even though those are also violations of international law, but framing his crimes in terms of health could potentially shame the Security Council’s stragglers into supporting the measures. After all, it’s tough for political figures to justify blocking medical care to innocents.

What do you international law gurus out there think? Without getting tangled in a debate about the merits and demerits of the "responsibility to protect," chew on this in the comments: a) does the argument hold water, and b) will the strategy work?

Thailand's King May Play Politics (No Offense)

Newsweek — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 14:37:34 GMT

Bangkok -- If you happened to have been in Thailand this week and wanted to read the December 6-10 issue of The Economist, you could have searched the country without finding a copy. That’s because it contained an article and editorial that were critical of King Bhumibol Adulyadej. Rather than risk insulting the king and offending his subjects, Asia Books, which imports the British weekly, chose not to distribute that particular edition.

The pre-emptive move was a sign of respect for the king but also an act of self-preservation. Few people or organizations in Thailand will risk doing anything that might be construed as an insult to the monarch. Thailand’s lese- majeste law may be the most draconian in the world, and it is strongly enforced: Offenders face up to 15 years in jail. Foreigners have been jailed for months and then expelled from the country. The riposte from friendly Thais to a farang contemplating a violation of the law is, “I hope you don’t plan to ever return to Thailand.”

The Economist, writing about Thailand’s current political imbroglio, alleges that the king, who turned 81 earlier this month, plays a role in politics. Officially, the sovereign, as head of state in a constitutional monarchy, is above politics. That alleged involvement, the magazine argues, is not helpful--especially in this time of political instability. Ever since the military ousted Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra in a bloodless coup in September 2006, the country has staggered from one government to the next. Just this week Parliament selected the fourth prime minister since the coup. Few people are willing to bet that the new premier, Abhisit Vejjajiva, of the Democrat Party, will last much longer that his immediate predecessor, Somchai Wongsarat, who hung on for 77 days.

Members of the royal family are said to be dismayed about the magazine’s stories, which get into controversial areas last visited in “The King Never Smiles,” a 2006 unauthorized biography by freelance writer Paul M. Handley. The book, banned in Thailand before it was even published, makes similar allegations about the monarchy. “The concern is the myth of a conspiracy between the king and the military,” says an individual with links to the Palace who spoke only on condition of anonymity and because he believes the articles are unfair. People in the king's inner circle “are genuinely distressed, because this fosters the ideas of conspiracy theorists.”

The Economist, the source pointed out, was not banned by the government. There was no need to do so because distributor acted voluntarily to withhold the offending edition. In the age of the Internet, banning publications anywhere is a tricky–and often futile–proposition, apart from in countries like China, Burma and North Korea, which tightly control acces to the Web. “Banning a magazine doesn’t make much sense any more, because it gets through – and they know that,” the source said, referring to the Palace. The Economist argues that the lese-majeste law should be revisited. For now, no such plans are on the drawing board.

France's Socialists: The Mothball Party

Tracy McNicoll — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 20:26:54 GMT

If the first few minutes of Martine Aubry’s three-year term as leader of the French Socialist Party are any indication, it's going to be a tough time.

Last night in Paris, Aubry was granted victory by 102 ballots, or 0.07 percent of the more than 134,700 votes cast. In a vast room above the art deco amphitheater where the party’s national council okayed her slim win, Aubry, seated, spoke to the press. She made all the predictable noises. She reached out to her defeated opponent, saying the party had to get back to work. She even took a few jabs at President Nicolas Sarkozy’s policies. But she hardly electrified her audience. Here and there among the jaded reporters were empty pink chairs.

Then, moments after Aubry had gone, losing candidate Ségolène Royal made her appearance, and suddenly there was media mayhem. Television crews, surprised by her audacious arrival, scrambled for their positions, screamed instructions as they ran. A scrum of cameramen, competing to capture Royal’s entrance up close and ignoring warnings barked by colleagues, backed into a row of tripods that fell with a clatter.

Royal gave her statement standing up, a phalanx of allies behind her, as photographers teetered on the pink chairs. She had just begun to speak -- “We have led a beautiful battle to transform to Socialist Party. And that battle continues” -- when a photographer lost his footing, knocking over a drinking glass that hit the floor with a loud crash. “There's the proof!” laughed Royal, without missing a beat.

Yes, Aubry's going to have her work cut out for her. For the last 18 months, since Sarkozy beat Royal in the presidential eleciton, he has utterly dominated French politics. Having obliterated the far right last year, he's now moved in on the center left. At a time of financial crisis, he’s shifted his discourse toward what might easily have been Socialist Party policies. He declared the end of laissez-fairism in September and he’s going to launch a major economic stimulus package during Aubry’s first full week in power.

Meanwhile Aubry's got to start her party slogging toward the June 2009 European elections, when second-string parties like the Greens already look like they'll be chipping away at Socialist constituencies. And in the 2010 regional elections, the party has everything to lose, since it nearly swept the field in 2004. “Martine Aubry has almost no margin for error," says political analyst Dominique Reynié, who heads the Foundation for Political Innovation in Paris, adding "she’ll be endlessly reminded that she has a job that she maybe shouldn’t have."

Last night, Ségolène Royal released a video for her supporters in which she reluctantly acquiesced (albeit with a bit of schadenfreude) to the results. She noted she'd gotten half the vote, then said, “Half? What am I saying? Surely a little bit more, because we weren’t allowed a new vote. That’s how it is.” C’est comme ça. More importantly, though, she sounded like she was hitting the campaign trail. Again. “We’re going to continue, because 2012 is soon, 2012 is tomorrow,” she said, promising initiatives like cheaper party memberships in districts she won. “I’m going to commit myself all the way. Because I have some time on my hands, with the way things turned out,” she laughed.

Aubry, for her part, has to worry not only about her avowed rival, Royal, but about her own ostensible allies. The motley coalition of old-guard heavyweights that brought her the party leadership had more distaste for Royal than political affinities with her. Keeping Royal out of office also keeps their presidential hopes alive. Now that they’ve (barely) slayed that dragon, finding common cause could be tough.

Outside the party, the Socialists’ enduring divisions create opportunities for reshaping France’s political landscape.

Centrist leader François Bayrou finished third to Royal and Sarkozy in the 2007 presidential race, but a split Socialist Party may widen the avenue for him to march up the middle. Whether or not to ally with Bayrou for the 2012 race became a major fault-line during the Socialist leadership battle (Royal is for, Aubry against), and if exasperated center-leftist Socialists choose him directly, it may be Bayrou who's troubling Sarkozy’s bid for a second term, not the Socialists.

Olivier Besancenot - mailman by day, charismatic young far-left leader by night - has been putting persistent pressure on the Socialists’ left flank. Now the increasingly popular communist revolutionary is using his momentum to mount a new anti-capitalist party (for now called, catchily, the New Anti-Capitalist Party). There, too, disappointed left-of-the-left Socialists could go postal and return the Socialists to sender.

But the big winner is Sarkozy. He's been spared any convincing opposition to his presidency thus far, and the new Socialist order – a divided party with its own well-oiled, internal opposition -- poses little threat in the immediate future. “The Socialist Party was supposed to come out of a complicated period with this convention and this election, to find its place again in the national opposition. On the contrary, they’re headed deeper into difficulty,” says Reynié. “In the months and years to come, they could perpetuate this scene of a party more opposed to itself than to Nicolas Sarkozy.” And in any case, Sarkozy has already dealt a deathblow to the widely discredited 35-hour workweek – Aubry’s best-known oeuvre.

In the street outside the amphitheatre last night, a handful of Ségolène Royal supporters from the suburbs north of Paris braved bitter cold with protest slogans hand-printed out on copy-machine paper. The veteran group of card-carrying lefties clearly had encyclopaedic knowledge of more glorious battles. They ticked off ancient history to support Royal’s stances. One cited an alliance with the center in the 1930s. “But Mitterrand, too! In ’71," chimed in another, looking for all the world as if she'd been there. Yet even these greying comrades wanted the old guard out, and with Aubry in, they felt frustrated. “The headquarters," said one, "smells like mothballs.”

Ségolène Royal Wins… Especially If She Loses.

Tracy McNicoll — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 19:30:57 GMT

photo: AFP

The French Socialist Party's search for a leader, already a long, long drama, has recently turned into a farce. For 18 months, ever since right-winger Nicolas Sarkozy was elected president, the Socialists have been so busy turning on each other that "Sarko," as he's called, has been able to act as if there's no opposition at all. And a vote by party members that was supposed to put an end to the backbiting last week only opened up a whole new round of bloodletting. The doggedly determined Martine Aubry, mother of the country's problematic 35-hour work week, declared victory Saturday after 134,000 ballots were counted. But her margin was a razor-thin 42 votes. So former presidential candidate Ségolène Royal is lobbying for a new round amid allegations of fraud, counter-charges of defamation and threatened court action. A party congress will pronounce on the results tonight, after two days of candidates’ representatives trading examples and counterexamples of accounting irregularities before a hastily assembled commission. And Royal might actually squeak ahead by a ballot or two. But, here's the thing: the biggest win for Ségolène Royal would be a loss.

Royal has never really been embraced by her party. At 55, she may have garnered the Socialist nomination for the 2007 presidential run, and borne four children to the outgoing Socialist Party leader, François Hollande. She may have been a second-string cabinet minister in Socialist governments through the 1990s and an advisor to France’s only Socialist president, François Mitterrand, through the 1980s. But none of that has been enough to make her an acceptable apparatchik in the eyes of her peers. Au contraire! She is derided – despised is not too strong a word – as an outsider. But she has learned to make that her greatest strength.

Considered at best a secondary figure in the party until 2006, Royal's bid for the presidential nomination seemed to come out of nowhere when she ran against two of the party's heavyweights. Former Prime Minister Laurent Fabius and former Finance Minister Dominique Strauss-Kahn (now head of the International Monetary Fund) openly mocked Royal’s chances -- then lost to her by humiliating margins. She went on to lead a campaign mostly outside the party’s ambit. It was headquartered, literally, outside the walls of the party's main building, drawing its strength from a massive internet-based campaign for direct “participative” democracy, which endeared her to the little people and but only stoked the ire of party veterans. Even party leader Hollande, Royal's consort, kept his distance from her, while their son Thomas campaigned with maman. (It was later revealed the couple had split secretly, and acrimoniously.) So the moment Royal lost to Sarkozy, by a 47-53 margin on May 6, 2007, the knives came out. Socialist heavyweights blamed Royal en masse. But as recent weeks have shown, much of the base stuck with her.

Royal surprised everyone on November 6 when her motion for the new Socialist Party platform secured the most votes from the party faithful. It won 29 percent support, with Paris mayor Bertrand Delanoë's proposal second and Martine Aubry third. Party custom has it that the sponsors of the losing motions look for compromises to gather behind the winning motion, but Royal couldn’t find that consensus. At the disastrous party convention that followed, the aspiring leaders whose motions she beat couldn’t get together enough to join forces, but were decided not to let her take the party in the leadership vote that followed.

Royal promised “a big popular party.” She promised to break open the Socialists' clunky political apparatus, involve the base in key decision-making, proposing a sort of “Socialist Facebook” and referenda on new ideas. One of those, her belief that the Socialist Party should keep open the option of allying with both leftists and centrists to beat Sarkozy in 2012, was particularly controversial. Faced with Sarkozy's proven ability to co-opt the right, the middle and even some stars of the moderate left, like French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, the party hacks seem determined to cling to margins.

Royal, meanwhile, has adopted a fairly funky new image. She’s dropped the chic, white-jacket-and-skirt look that became her trademark during the presidential campaign and now favors colouful Indian-style tunics over jeans. At a September political rally she mixed politics with musical acts. Critics disparaged the show as “too American” and her speech as “too religious,” “too mystical,” when she chanted “Fra-ter-ni-té” over and over to 4,000 supporters. “When I talk about fraternity, some snicker, but when Barack Obama based his campaign on fraternity everybody was blissful with admiration,” she responded on French radio last week. “Well, people will get used to it. They’ll get used to my political identity. They’ll get used to me remaining myself to better change the Socialist Party.”

The winner – for now – meanwhile -- sort of is Martine Aubry, 58, who's quite popular in lefty apparatchik circles. The daughter of former European Commissioner Jacques Delors, she has headed more prestigious government ministries than Royal and has drawn support from politically disparate Socialist Party heavyweights like Fabius and allies of Strauss-Kahn, known as “les éléphants." Aubry warned members that Royal would turn the Socialist Party into a “party of fans” rather than one of activists. And she has ruled out, four years in advance, allying with the center in 2012, saying she would only entertain alliances with staunch leftists like the Communist Party. After the preliminary rounds last week, Aubry was supposed to collect everybody else's votes and beat Royal handily. But she didn’t.

For now, it would seem, the disparate front of party traditionalists overtly opposed to Royal could manage no more than 50.02 percent of the vote. Indeed, while leaked numbers vary, Royal’s second-in-command this morning alleged that the margin had narrowed… to only four votes. Tonight, the party’s national council will rule on the results. The council is in its majority hostile to Royal, who only has 29 percent of the members (in line with the percentage of votes she picked up November 6, with her winning party line). She has called for a new vote, while her camp has threatened demonstrations and even legal action if its electoral complaints aren’t heard. All of that risks prolonging the party’s agony while sounding whiny to public opinion.

But if Royal loses tonight, and calls off her dogs, she may well wind up ahead in the long term.

“Ségolène Royal doesn’t come out of this fight weakened, far from it,” says Zaki Laïdi of the Centre for European Studies in Paris. He argues that the close scores show, first and foremost, the failure of the party heavyweights’ strategy of Royal “containment.” “Very honestly, I never believed as much in Ségolène Royal’s political chances as I do today, because she’s shown a capacity to fight and to overcome obstacles. It shows that they’re having more and more trouble containing her. Every time you think she’s dead, she charges back.”

“If there is one lesson here, I think it’s that the rise in strength and the control of Ségolène Royal now is paradoxically inexorable,” concludes Laïdi.

“In any case, she wins,’ concurs Gérard Grunberg, of Paris’s Institute of Political Studies. “First, the rest are divided: all those against her are divided. Next, they will be on the defensive all the time, because they defend the old ideas. And third, I think she is very, very intelligent at appearing as the victim. She’ll develop the argument ‘The Socialists wanted change. Change was prevented.’ So I wouldn’t be surprised if she goes up in the polls more than Martine Aubry.” And while Royal is free to make her case, Aubry, of course, would be stuck putting the pieces back together at party headquarters. Royal would be able to claim as much favor with the party faithful as Aubry, but operate as she has in the past, as the outsider from the inside. She will have one foot in the party with her representation on the national council and one foot out. The leader’s term is only three years, meaning the job will be up for grabs again in plenty of time for the 2012 presidential campaign.

So as the Socialist Party’s “parliament” gets set to meet tonight to parse an impossibly close ballot and take the next step, the political advice to Royal seems clear: Protest, lady, but not too much. Not enough to get stuck winning.

(Photo by AFP/Miguel Medina)

Songs in the Key of Chavez

Katie Paul — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 22:17:04 GMT

The Democrats have Bruce Springsteen, Republicans have Hank Williams, Jr., and Hugo Chávez has, well, Hugo Chávez.

As part of a political media blitz enveloping Venezuela this month, the bombastic president's United Socialist Party of Venezuela released an album of celebratory tunes in the run-up to this Sunday's state and local elections, widely seen as a national referendum on Chávez's socialist political project. "Music for the Battle" features eighteen songs lauding the Bolivarian Revolution and calling for electoral victory. What's more, to our great joy here at Why It Matters, the Web-savvy Chavistas have uploaded the whole thing onto their Website and made it available to the public free of charge.

El Comandante himself makes an appearance on two tracks. The highly recommend "Militants with Chávez" consists of excerpts of his speeches layered over a reggae-rap track. He also belts out a rousing ode to the cavalry in "El Corrido de la Caballería." It's not the president's first foray into the entertainment business; last year, he released his first album of schmaltzy folk hymns, "Songs for All Time," based on the musical selections that close his regular radio and TV broadcasts. Ever the ham, Chávez is also prone to breaking into song in the middle of his rallies, giving rise to a well-documented musical genre of his own on YouTube.

Will song and dance be enough? As voters head to the polls, it doesn't look like it. Even though El Comandante still enjoys approval ratings of some 60 percent, Chavistas are bracing for losses in key races for the first time since they swept to power along with their charismatic president. "People have learned to distinguish between Chávez and Chávez's candidates," one opposition figure told El País. Whichever way the electoral winds blow, though, Venezuela's leading man will surely continue to sing his swan song for years to come.

To Russia, U.S. Election Was Like a Soap Opera

Newsweek — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 22:02:25 GMT

By Anna Nemtsova

Russians show a big interest in the American elections. Echo of Moscow radio covered only the U.S. elections last night, inviting politicians, think tankers and opposition activists to their night talk show to answer phone calls and comment on the election results. At 10 pm, 78.1 percent of callers wanted to see Obama as next American president.

Mikhail Delyagin, the head of Institute of Problems of Globalization, explained such the public interest: "We do no not have elections in Russia any longer. Everybody understands here that it would be impossible for them to actually elect the president. To vote for deputies in parliament would be useless as well, as they are practically appointed. So Russians watch the American election as an interesting, thrilling film about someone's life."

A public opinion poll by the Levada Center on November 1 showed 27 percent of Russians would like to see Obama as America's president, 15 percent McCain, 29 percent said neither of them and 29 percent said they found it difficult to answer the question.

Garry Kasparov, the leader of the Other Russia opposition coalition, said that Obama symbolizes a change: "American voters chose to have the change. The fact that a Democrat, Obama, might not be too strict in foreign policy issues or security issues, especially now, when America is at war with terror, could have played against Obama. But nothing worked against him."

Irina Khakamada, a former leader of Union of Right Forces democrat party and parliament deputy speaker told Newsweek: "The Kremlin is happy Obama won. McCain was seen as an old opponent, while Obama is a clean page for the Kremlin. At least there is no burden of negative past experience – that is good for Russian – American relations."

Mikhail Margelov, Chairman of the Committee of Foreign Affairs of the Federation Council, said in a phone interview that Russian political elite does have high hopes for Obama: "American people have chosen to make a change. We welcome the new leader and have hopes that by change the new leadership means not pragmatic and ideologically charged, but fare relations with modern Russia; we hope that from selective cooperation our relations can develop into equal partnership." Margelov said in a phone interview.

Sergey Markov, Duma deputy said to Newsweek: "The Russian political elite is against the neo-conservative Bush government and we would not be surprised to see some of them, like Mr. Chaney, on trial some time soon. America is a great nation; this time, like many times in past history, American nation showed an example of how to make changes and give the world hope. Americans can be capable of electing a black president, despite the racial issues they had not so long ago, in the 70's. We count on strategic partnership with the United States, as we have many common interests. For that American politicians should say goodbye to imperialistic positions of influence in the world, and stop making ridiculous statements like 'Russian influence is limited by its boarders.'"

President Medvedev said in his annual address to nation: "We hope that our partners - the new U.S. administration - will make a choice in favor of a full-fledged relationship with Russia." And: "Progress in Russian-American cooperation would be key." … "It is not a secret that a large number of countries, acting by inertia, tend to look back on where the wind blows in Russia's relations with the United States. It is true that these relations are not going through the easiest period today."… "We also have a large number of questions, including those of a moral nature," the Russian president said. "But I would like to stress that we have no problems with the American people. We have no inherent anti-Americanism," he said.

Sergey Bobovnikov, 42, an antiques dealer: "I am concerned about our dollars. If Obama really withdraws the American army from Iraq as he promised, the dollar will grow immediately weak, as oil production in Iraq will stop being secured. I foresee big problems to follow this victory."

Marina Goichneko, 48, an opera singer: "Medvedev just said he would change our constitution nd extend his term to six years. That is not fair; just like our election. I like the American election, it looks like it is real. I am surprised Americans managed to overcome the issue of skin color. Even for mericans it is very brave. Russians would not be able to make such choice any time soon."

Konstantin Nefyodov, 80, a pensioner. "I believe our newspapers. They say Obama is better than McCain because he does not hate Russians so much. Of course I like him better for that. He has a kind face. I am happy they elected Obama."

Nadezhda Tarasenko, 23, a student, studies state management: "I would not make quick judgments. One thing is what Obama said before the elections, and another what his actions will show. Especially I am concerned about the way he is going to treat Russia. Lets wait and see."

Japan: A Powerful Message

Newsweek — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 20:25:11 GMT

By Akiko Kashiwagi

Tokyo- Analysts and commentators alike took the election results as a testament to America’s strong desire for a change and responded positively. The image of thousands of Americans listening to his victory speech, some with tears in their eyes, seems to be sending a strong impression that the United States is going through a historic moment. “I see an enormous urge among Americans to want to see change and to see that [as I watch the campaign] in turn makes us foreigners feel excited about what changes are to come,” says Kenichi Sakata, a 31-year old think-tank researcher. “This is a scene we haven’t seen here,” says an anchor woman in the evening news.

On Wednesdy, all the television channels have been doing news shows from morning till evening. That’s not probably surprising as the Japanese have demonstrated an unusually high interest in this U.S. election. Over the last few days, scores of Japanese media organizations including all the major network stations have sent dozens of reporters to U.S. cities including Chicago , Phoenix and even to Kenya to beam back live programs. The energy and time spent on the coverage is no less generous compared with domestic Japanese elections.

Behind Japan’s enthusiasm with this U.S. election is their sense of frustration and stagnation with their own politics, say experts. Japan has been ruled by the same party for nearly half a century and dominated by second or third generation politicians. For that reason, Obama’s fresh messages seem to have a strong appeal. Yusuke Inoue, a 30-year old businessman who works for an ad agency, is one of those many Japanese who are watching the presidential race closely. “Personally, I am glad to see him win. I’d never been so intrigued and inspired by a politician’s speech until I heard him. He gives out a message so powerful that I’ve been tempted to even read speech scripts since the primary and watch him on YouTube. His speeches make me feel that there is something I can do, too.”

Expectations are high for the new president. “Traditionally politicians tend to become more conservative in a crisis. But my expectations this time are that he would not go that way, but would pursue international cooperation and policies that are based on global interests. I hope to hear him elaborate on these issues as soon as possible,” says Mitsushige Tsuruno, who runs a business consultancy in Tokyo. Says Inoue: “I hope he will try to exert strong leadership not just domestically but globally.”

The news comes as Japan expects to see its own election in the near future, though the timing is still up in the air. Inoue feels Japan does not have strong political leaders who can deliver effective speeches and excite the public. Even so, Obama’s arrival at the White House has added to his expectation for Japanese politics to change somehow, he says. He was particularly impressed by the role Obama’s massive campaign volunteers and small donors played in the election, both of which hardly exist in Japan.

Sakata, a researcher at a think tank affiliated with Japan’s opposition party, says Obama’s campaign style has prompted a debate among his colleagues. “The crucial problem in Japan is that people tend to feel that [Japanese] politicians exist in a far away planet.” To see Mr. Obama reach out to American people underscored his impression that there is a gap between Japanese people and politicians that should be filled somehow, he says. Sakata has all the more reason to take the latest news seriously as Japan’s opposition party is seen having a chance of overtaking the majority of both houses, a watershed event. “[Obama’s victory] gives us a huge opportunity.

Meanwhile, one small city in northern Japan is having a field day, celebrating the election of Barack Obama as if it were in the United States. That’s because the city happens to share the same name as the new president: Obama City. The town started a voluntary campaign in February to root for the Senator as part of its effort to revitalize its aging port. On Wednesay, locals were serving up “Obama burgers” and performing with hula-hoops in city hall.

Pakistan: Enthusiastic, But Circumspect

Newsweek — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 18:02:23 GMT

By Fasih Ahmed

Lahore -Reactions in Pakistan to America’s historic presidential elections run the gamut from enthusiastic approval, especially among the country’s educated young, to outraged disbelief, especially among Pakistanis who remember Obama as the presidential candidate who vowed to send troops into Pakistan if Osama Bin Laden were pinpointed and the Pakistani government failed to capture or kill him.

"I am really happy and excited for America today!” said Anum Sohail, a social worker. “It’s commendable what they’ve done, it’s history we can all learn from.” She said it was unfortunate that Obama didn’t allow himself to be photographed with Muslims on the campaign trail. “But anti-Islam sentiment is so high there that I guess he had to be careful,” she said. She did not expect U.S. policy toward Pakistan to change under President Obama. “It’s shameful how our leaders have made us so dependent on the U.S.,” said Mujeeb Shah, 38, a bookstore checkout clerk. “Obama will not change the U.S. policy of invading and killing Muslims,” he said. “America should leave us alone and respect our sovereignty!”

Adeel Butt, a 23-year-old lights salesman, says it’s too early to know what an Obama presidency will mean for Pakistan. But he has suggestions: “They should help us bring prices down, end poverty and give us cheap oil,” he said.

Citing Vice President-elect Joe Biden’s friendship with assassinated former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and Obama’s friendship with Pakistanis while at Columbia University and his visits as a student to this country, Sen. Safdar Abbasi from the ruling Pakistan People’s Party says an Obama presidency augurs well for democracy in Pakistan. “Both Obama and Biden are friends of the Pakistani people and will support our recently-won democracy,” he said. The Biden-Lugar Bill would provide Pakistan with $15 billion over 10 years.

See the full round-up of the world's reaction to the election of Barack Obama.

Brazil: ‘The Beginning of Moral Regeneration’

Mac Margolis — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 18:01:48 GMT

Rio de Janeiro- Though most Latin Americans were asleep when Barack Obama claimed victory late last night, they woke up in a state of grace. From morning newscasts to talk radio, from coffee shops to cyberspace, the chatter was all about Obama’s victory and its portents for the region and the world. The legion of pundits and commentators proclaimed a new era of “esperanza”—hope—echoing in the vernacular Obama’s patented slogan, but also a kind of end of days for a brand of politics that had won the United States global enmity. “The beginning of moral regeneration,” heralded a leading columnist in La Nacion, the big Argentina newspaper. “How incredible that the United States, whose chief enemies recently were named Hussein and Osama, has elected a President Hussein Obama.” wrote Hermógenes Pérez de Arce, a columnists for El Mercúrio of Chile. The Brazilian daily O Estado de São Paulo was more succinct. “Change Has Arrived,” blared the banner headline.

Latin America, not unlike the rest of the world, has long been loco por Obama, of course. Opinion polls consistently gave him a 7 or 8 to one margin over McCain in Central and South America. “What took you so long,” you could almost hear them gasping. Latin media were deployed in record numbers to cover the campaign, following the candidates from stump to stump. (No matter that Obama the candidate rarely missed an opportunity to pillory free trade agreements; he voted against the Colombia-U.S. bilateral trade pact and has called for an overhaul of the North American Free Trade Agreement between the U.S., Mexico and Canada that most Latins and U.S. Latinos enthusiastically support.) Obama is “the better choice for U.S. president…for Latin America, for the Hispanic community, for the United States and for the world,” said Poder, a leading Hispanic monthly edited in Miami and distributed widely in Latin America.

In a way that’s surprising. A mid October poll by Latinobarometro, conducted in 18 countries in Central and South America, shows that while Latins may be enthusiastic about Obama, they have low expectations. Asked which candidate would be best for Latin America, Obama won by a margin of almost four to one. But 63 percent of respondents said that it didn’t matter, they had no opinion, or declined to answer. Only 22 percent said they thought the next U.S. president would pay more attention to the region. The Brazilian ambassador to the United States recently told of penning a four-page letter to Obama laying out key regional policy issues. In the name of four Latin nations, he hand delivered the letter to Dan Restrepo, a top Obama aide in August—and never heard another word about it. But don’t tell that to Luiz Roberto Costa, a computer technician in Rio de Janeiro and an ardent Obama fan. “Here is a guy who worked and studied and lifted himself up. He’s a ray of light,” says Costa. “Like it or not, we are all connected to the U.S. Our economic stability depends on you [Americans]. He is change and that change is going to be good for Brazil and good for the world.” But as a Brazilian saying goes, “hope is the last to die.”

Kenya: Things Will Never Be the Same

Newsweek — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 18:00:48 GMT

By Steve Bloomfield

Nairobi- Barack Obama’s victory was greeted with unbridled joy in Kenya, the east African country that has claimed him as one of their own. From the lakeside village where his late father grew up and many of his relatives still live, to the capital, Nairobi, Kenyans stayed up all night to watch the results, which were broadcast on state television. The victory celebrations, which began at 7am local time when the polls closed on the west coast, continued all day.

The new president’s step-grandmother, Sarah Obama, told reporters she might visit Washington for the inauguration but hoped that her life would not change too much.Despite visiting the country on just three occasions, Obama has become Kenya’s biggest star. His toothy grin beams out from the back of Nairobi’s matatus, the ramshackle 14-seater minivans used for public transport. Street hawkers peddle home-made Obama merchandise including t-shirts bearing the slogan ‘Yes we can’ and dollar bills emblazoned with the President-elect’s face.

The Kenyan government has sought to exploit Obama’s victory, announcing a national public holiday on Thursday. President Mwai Kibaki’s spokesman, Alfred Mutua, described the election as a “a defining moment in Kenya’s history and the history of the world. Things will never be the same again.”

Kenyans’ enthusiasm for Obama is not matched when it comes to their own politicians. Many of the current government have been accused of corruption, while some are thought to have been involved in orchestrating the post-election violence which killed 1,500 people at the start of the year. Ory Okolloh, a Kenyan blogger, said: “I hope the irony of our corrupt and selfish politicians declaring a public holiday to celebrate the virtues of Obama and his campaign is not lost on us as Kenyans.”

Obama’s father was a Luo, one of Kenya’s most marginalized tribes. Luo politicians have struggled to gain power and few believe Obama would have had much chance of becoming president of Kenya if he had been born here. The United States has elected a Luo president before Kenya—something that has not gone unnoticed by prominent Luo politicians here.

But Obama’s victory could change the way Kenyans view politics. Peter Gaithuma, a 40-year-old father of three from the market town of Kiambu in central Kenya, said the election of a minority candidate should teach Kenyans to ignore ethnic backgrounds when choosing their leaders. “Americans did not look at his race,” he said, “they looked at his leadership skills.” If Kenyans did the same, Gaithuma said, anyone could become president. “We can even have a Maasai president,” he said.

South Africa: Jubilation!

Newsweek — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 17:34:25 GMT

By Karen MacGregor

Durban - People across Africa danced with jubilation as Barack Obama swept to victory in yesterday’s remarkable election, and were moved to tears by the victory speech of the man who will soon become America’s first black president. From Cape Town to Timbuktu, people sat up overnight watching television and huddling around radios, or woke at dawn to learn that the man they claim as a son of Africa had become the worlds most powerful leader.

In Kenya, people celebrated in the streets of Nairobi and in the western village of Kogelo, home of Sarah Obama, grandmother of the man they consider a hero, and whose face graces billboards and busses. President Mwai Kibaki declared Thursday a public holiday so that people could celebrate the first Kenyan in the White House. “This is a momentous day not only in the history of the United States, but also for those living in Kenya,” Kibaki said.

People threw election parties around South Africa. In Johannesburg, an all-nighter organised by Americans in Africa for Obama drew 200 people and offered four big-screen televisions playing CNN, booze and breakfast, dance floors and music and Obama memorabilia. Given the crime rates in South Africa, security guards were on hand to keep order. “We had a great mix of people—Americans, South Africans and people from around Africa,” said co-organiser Nastasya Tay. “Obama’s speech was an oh-my-God moment. People wept and chanted, ‘Yes, we can’.” Although not part of the official Obama campaign, the non-profit Americans in Africa for Obama group has been active in several countries, fundraising and holding events in support of their candidate in much the same vein as volunteers back home.

South African President Kgalema Motlanthe said today that Africa stands proud of Obama. For millions of people particularly those of African descent, in Africa and in the Diaspora his victory represented “hope of change they can believe in.” The ruling African National Congress was confident the Obama administration would “work to strengthen ties between the United States and Africa, building on development initiatives already in place, and forging a genuine partnership to tackle challenges facing the continent,” said spokesperson Jessie Duarte in a statement.

See the full round-up of the world's reaction to the election of Barack Obama.

Doug Franke, vice-president of the local American Chamber of Commerce Doug, pointed out that both Obama and Joe Biden have said they see Africa as a key partner in the future. “So I think we have exciting times ahead of us.” Already, he told The Times newspaper, the U.S. gives $25 billion a year in aid, and democrats have indicated they would like to double the amount. “About a quarter of that goes to Sub-Saharan Africa. So South Africa should see an increase.” In terms of trade, last year more than 98 percent of South Africa’s exports to the U.S. were duty free, under the American Growth and Opportunities Act. “The doors are open for business with the States. With the Democratic Party in power we will have a new window of opportunity to relook at what other barriers there are.”

However, the expectations of African governments might be overblown, warned Tom Wheeler, a foreign policy research associate for the South African Institute of International Affairs at the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. “There will be many calls on Obama’s time to deal with the financial crisis, Iraq, Afghanistan and a host of domestic issues. An Africa high on the agenda would be wishful thinking.” So while Obama is likely to be sympathetic towards Africa, he will struggle to deliver, Wheeler predicted: “Also, the Bush administration has been very generous to Africa, and I wonder how much more Obama will really be able to find to pour into Africa in financial terms.”

Africans might see Obama as the best chance yet of greater U.S. involvement with the world’s poorest continent, but the overwhelming response to his victory has been one of black pride. “People were watching TVlast night, and they are very happy that Obama won because hes a black man,” said Mdudusi Ndlovu, a personal assistant who lives in the sprawling suburb of Inanda outside Durban, South Africas second biggest city. “We are also happy for Kenya.”

Nobel laureate Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu likened the atmosphere following Obama’s victory to South Africa’s democratic transition. In a statement today he described the election as “an epoch-making event filling the whole world with hope that change is possible and boosting the confidence of people of color. We have a new spring in our walk and our shoulders are straighter. It is almost as when Nelson Mandela became President of South Africa in 1994,” Tutu added. Mandela said Obama’s victory demonstrated that anyone can “dare to dream of wanting to change the world for a better place.”

South Korea: Worried about Free Trade

Newsweek — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 17:32:47 GMT

By B. J. Lee

Seoul- South Koreans have mixed feelings about Obama’s election. On the one hand, they expect Obama to reduce tensions on the Korean peninsula by engaging in dialogue with North Korea, as he promised many times during his campaign. Unlike President Bush who refused to talk to Pyongyang during the first six years of his term, Obama is likely to try and resolve the North’s nuclear weapons program. On the other hand, they worry that Obama’s protectionist stance could hurt the Korean economy, which depends heavily on trade. The Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement has to be ratified by the U.S. Congress as well as the Korean National Assembly, and experts in Seoul fear the new Democratic administration in Washington may not be enthusiastic it. Obama has said the FTA is unfair in that Korea exports hundreds of thousands of cars to the United States and buys only a few thousand American cars every year.

On security, Obama is expected to continue the six-party talks for the North’s nuclear problem, which involve the U.S., Japan, Russia, China and both Koreas. The six-party talks have recently shown some progress, with the North agreeing to disable its nuclear facilities in exchange for Washington’s removal of Pyongyang from the list of terrorism-sponsoring states. “Obama said he will even talk to enemies,” says Yang Sung Chul, a former Korean ambassador to Washington. “Such a conciliatory attitude will help promote trust between Washington and Pyongyang, reducing tensions not only on the Korean peninsula, but also the Far East.” But for the current Korean administration of President Lee Myung Bak, that can be a problem. Lee is not very keen on engaging with the North until its nuclear threat is removed completely. “Lee’s tough and Obama’s soft stance toward Pyongyang can collide at times,” warns Lee Jung Hoon, a professor at Seoul’s Yonsei University.

The changes Obama promised are also met with mixed feelings in Korea. Liberals are hopeful that Obama’s bold reforms will fix economic and other problems of the United States as well as the whole world. “Obama’s election is a historic democratic revolution,” Yang notes. “He is the message of hope for the underprivileged people in the world.” But his promises for sweeping changes also make conservatives nervous. They worry drastic measures to change Washington’s foreign policy can further aggravate troubles in Iraq and elsewhere. “To tackle the recession and other problems in the U.S., Obama needs bold measures,” says Professor Lee. “But for foreign policy, we don’t need too many surprises that can undermine the existing order.”

See the full round-up of the world's reaction to the election of Barack Obama.

Israel: Mixed Feelings

Newsweek — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 17:30:33 GMT

By Kevin Peraino and Nuha Musleh

Jerusalem- For Israelis, Obama’s victory was bittersweet. At a number of key moments over the past eight years—including during the second intifada and the 2006 Lebanon war—the Bush Administration stood squarely behind the Jewish state. Despite increasing disillusion with Bush’s “freedom agenda,” many Israelis were unwilling to turn on what they saw as a steadfast ally in the Republican party. “Bush was very good for [Israel],” says Shai Bazak, a former aide to Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu. “I know they don’t like him in the States, but he’s very popular here.” Still, he added, “I don’t think this president is going to change a lot. Israel is the least of his problems.” Reaction in the Israeli press was mixed; at least some government officials grumbled that Obama was an unknown quantity and worried that he might soften the American position toward Iran. For the most part, though, Israelis took the news in stride. “It’s safe to assume that Obama will not abandon Israel,” wrote Aluf Benn in Wednesday’s editions of Israel’s Ha’aretz newspaper.

At a breakfast reception at Jerusalem’s King David Hotel hosted by the American ambassador to Israel, James Cunningham, Israelis stepped over red-white-and-blue balloons and watched on flat-screen televisions as the results came in. One wore a popular pro-McCain t-shirt that made a pun out of the Hebrew words for yes (”ken”) and no (”lo”). It read: “Mc-Ken,” and under it, “Lo-bama.” Other Israeli guests quietly insisted that they were relieved to see the Illinois senator prevail. “I think it’s about time for a change,” said one, requesting anonymity in order to speak freely. Still, he added, “I don’t really think anything’s going to change.” As for Israeli officials, Cunningham says a number have told him in recent weeks that they were “impressed” with Obama during his recent trip to the Middle East.

Palestinians, who have been largely disgusted with Bush’s Middle East policies, were thrilled with the election results. “I’m excited,” says Haider Shafi, who sells coffee at a Bethlehem checkpoint. “All night I listened to the radio. He wants a solution. He’ll definitely help us.” Even as many remained skeptical that an Obama Administration would drastically shift American Mideast policy, some Palestinians couldn’t help getting swept up in the moment. Mahmoud Hassan, a 45-year-old Palestinian laborer, spent three hours waiting at a checkpoint Wednesday morning. “I should be pessimistic about American policies,” he said. “But I’m not.” Still, Palestinians worried about the president-elect’s safety; many are concerned that he could be assassinated. Others speculated that an Obama White House alone would not dramatically re-orient American loyalties. “It’s the Congress that counts,” said Palestinian Mouhamad Salame, as he waited at the Bethlehem checkpoint.

See the full round-up of the world's reaction to the election of Barack Obama.

France: ‘We All Want to be American’

Newsweek — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 17:28:24 GMT

By Tracy McNicoll and Ginny Power

Paris- The reaction to Obama’s victory among the political classes and people on the street was one of explicit joy, hope, and a sort of open affection for American founding values that had gone into hiding through the Bush years. Some people did, however, wonder aloud whether Obama could live up to the exceptional hopes vested in him worldwide.

The historic news was announced at 5 a.m. local time. As folks scurried to work, dodging traffic and bending against the cold, wet wind, ordinary French people applauded America’s choice. That came as no surprise, perhaps, after polls have repeatedly shown massive support for Barack Obama among the French.

One woman gave a thumbs up as she rushed to work, “It’s great!,” she said, “But I can’t stop to talk!” Nathalie Bibrac, 24, also in a rush, spoke as she walked. “The first black president is a good thing. I didn’t really think it could happen,” she said. “There is often a gap between the projected votes and the reality. I think America wanted change.”

Jean Ricoux, General Manager of the Meridien Montparnasse Hotel, attended the U.S. Embassy’s ‘morning after’ breakfast. “The impact of a black man in America goes beyond U.S. borders,” Ricoux said. “But the color of [Obama’s] skin doesn’t even matter. It’s his substance, intelligence and composure. America voted for ‘the man’.”

Pascal Eudes, a 46-year-old construction site manager, had more typically Gallic reservations about Obama’s victory. “It might bring good things, but it’s happening at a very bad time and can go either way,” Eudes said. “There is a real crisis going on in America. I hope Obama can help the black community to feel part of the greater community and that he can get everyone back to work. But it can also provoke tensions and everyone has to go forward together.” Muamba Ntumba, a 50-year-old construction site boss who came to France 20 years ago from Zaire, was less pessimistic. “This is a great hope for change. I don’t think that blacks thought this could really happen. This is a show of hope for big changes.”

Mickael Theodore is a 33-year-old salesman, says he was pinching himself. “When I saw the news at 7:00 this morning, I could hardly believe it. I thought it was a joke, that I was watching ’24’ and that it was fiction,” said Theodore, elated. “Everything is possible in America. It’s magnificent. France needs to draw lessons from this. The Socialist party is made up of a bunch of dinosaurs fighting for a piece of …what? I’m really happy because when America coughs, France catches a cold. Things can only get better.”

Obama’s victory also let the French political class unleash their thinly veiled joy. Sarkozy wrote to Obama to congratulate him on his victory, telling Obama his election inspires “an enormous hope.” Bernard Kouchner told French radio, “We weren’t allowed to say until now the candidate we’d picked in our hearts and minds. Now, we can say it, and it isn’t discourteous to Mr. McCain, who had a very nice campaign.” In a communiqué Kouchner had said “American democracy has just lived a magnificent moment, one of these major rendez-vous that periodically show its vitality, its faith in the future, and its confidence in the values that founded it more than two centuries ago.”

Rama Yade, the Senegalese-born State Secretary for Foreign Affairs and Human Rights—the only black member of the French government—declared, “I think this morning we all want to be American.” She compared Obama’s victory to the fall of the Berlin Wall times ten.” She also called the victory an “immense psychological revolution for France,’ picking up on a theme that has dominated in France throughout Obama’s campaign, in the country’s soul-searching on whether a French Barack Obama would be possible.

On the other side of the aisle, François Hollande, the leader of Socialist Party, declared, “The election of Barack Obama is a victory first and foremost of the American people. It had this audacity, this courage, this strength to choose, not simply the camp of progress… but a man whose orgins, positions, and skin color everyone knew. It’s a choice that has resonance even outside the United States of America.”

See the full round-up of the world's reaction to the election of Barack Obama.