Obama, McCain and Western Sahara

RDB writes that the election matters most to “Third World countries that live under Uncle Sam's wing, or worse, rot under the boots of his GIs” and agrees that an Obama win would be a chance for America to make history.

However, there is another issue Moroccans should consider: the fate of Western Sahara:

A Maroc, les élections américaines représentent un enjeu plus que majeur, puisque directement liées (qui dans ce monde ne l’est pas?) à l’avenir du pays. La connexion directe s’établissant dans les relations Mc Cain-Maroc et Obama-Mandela. Quoi?! C’est plus simple que ça n’en a l’air. Mc Cain l’ancien président du comité d’amitié marocco-américain, est le choix du Maroc, puisqu’il semble tourné vers les intérêts du royaume du moins sur le papier, tandis qu’Obama est un ami d’un vieil homme appelé Nelson Mandela. Vous ne voyez toujours pas l’anguille? Fouillez sous roche, où mieux sous sable…Le Sahara!

Oui, c’est un peu tiré par les cheveux, mais c’est une option qui peut se vérifier…On sait tous que Mandela, l’icone mondiale de la liberation des minorités, est un protecteur et défenseur de la cause séparatrice du polisario. Par extention, Obama pourrait être influencé dans ce sens et faire basculer la balance…

Si cette hyppothèse se vérifie, le Maroc croisera les doigts pour que Mc Cain sorte gagnant des urnes…

A reader, Cogito, writes that while he's still thinking, RDB's post has nearly made him change his mind about Obama:

En parlant de ton article à un ami, il vient de me confirmer qu’effectivement c’est le parti républicain qui a toujours été du coté du Maroc en ce qui concerne le dossier du Sahara. Le parti démocrate étant toujours du coté des minorités….

Et moi qui faisait que défendre et espérait qu’Obama soit à la tete des Etats-unis sinon ça serait la catastrophe avec ce Mccain’sh, je me retrouve en train de revoir ma position, par amour pour mon pays, par pragmatisme parce que la priorité pour moi est l’avenir du Maroc avant tout…

But Spy Jones doesn't think Western Sahara is much of an issue:

Un McCain soit-disant pro-Maroc, et qui prône le prolongement indéfini de l’Iraq… Tu trouves ça défendable comme parti pris ??

Je crois qu’il ne faut pas se faire d’illusions, et que la question du Sahara ne sera pas perdue au Maroc à cause d’Obama (Cet ignare de McCain ne fera pas bouger les choses ne serait-ce que d’un iota), et qu’il vaudrait mieux soutenir Obama pour mettre fin à une guerre injuste et cruelle qui a ravagée un pays entier, et qui l’a mise à feu et à sang.

En plus de pouvoir mieux traiter avec la crise financière que ne le ferais McCain, Obama sera moins belliqueux que Bush et consorts, et ne cherchera pas à provoquer une guerre avec l’Iran pour servir les interêts des lobbies militaires.

Belier, a supporter of Ron Paul, writes in the comments that choosing between Obama and McCain is like choosing between Pepsi and Coca-Cola.  “à 2012 peut être!”  “Maybe in 2012!” he writes.

Facebook group: Moroccans for Obama

On the Facebook group, Moroccans for Obama, some Moroccans rallied in support of Obama, others remain cynical about his chances:

Karim, posting from Orlando, FL, writes:

c lui la sollution pr la pai en iraq!! et c lui la sollution pr la survie des américains aussi, ils doivent etre des idiots pr ne pas voter pr lui!!

obama for change …c le seul démocrate qui pourra apporter la paix ds le monde en tt cas pr le moment… jespere qu'il restera ainsi une fois élu président of usa…to be continued

Oui moi aussi je soutien Barrack Oubama j'espère bien qu'il va pas nous décevoir,et qu'il va travailler pour le bien de ce monde.Obama et mille fois mieux que Mc cain = (Mc cayne meno walo)

Moussa, a Moroccan living in Kentucky, writes:

I admire this guy, but in the white america he has no chance. race is a big issue. i lived in kentucky and i am 1000% sure people wont vote for him cuz he is black.

Louarni Ashraf:

they have one chance to prouve that USA is not a racist country …i don't think that it's hard to realize …everybody want to see an african american as a president of the united states of america !! god bless ya nigga !!

Faty Owns You:

It's all false hope.

He surely will be the president…until he gets shot.

Here is what some Ukrainian bloggers think of the political situation in their country.

LJ user logvynenko wrote this (UKR) about the general incompetence of the main political players represented in the Ukrainian parliament - Yulia Tymoshenko's Bloc (BYuT), Our Ukraine-People's Self-Defense Bloc (NUNS) and the Party of Regions (PR):

[…] We've already seen the collaboration of all possible configurations of the political forces that are present in the parliament. BYuT+PR, NUNS+PR, BYuT+NUNS. None of these collaborations resulted in getting the following issues resolved:

- [Lawmakers' immunity from prosecution] has not been lifted - a promise made by practically [every political force]

- Tax cuts haven't been introduced, even though they were promising to do it at least regarding the [value-added tax]

And so on. I can name dozens of these [unresolved] issues. But these [two] are the most popular.

So, I don't see a point in [re-electing] the lawmakers who worked in [the parliament of this convocation]. Because it'll change nothing. When it is necessary to decide on important issues, they are fighting for power and everything else - and this is all they are doing.

I am electing them so that they worked, and instead they are wasting their time on [popular political TV talk shows].

I AM NOT VOTING FOR ANY OF THE PARTIES THAT ARE NOW PRESENT IN THE PARLIAMENT

And don't try to scare me that this will help [Victor Yanukovych of the Party of Regions] - just don't.

[…]

Do you want a new life? Let's elect different people.

There were some among LJ user logvynenko's readers who were not aware of any new political forces that could be considered a good alternative to the already established ones:

anatolkukula:

Do you have info on whether someone new is going to appear (someone truly new)?

There were those who favored being as careful about the “new” forces as about the “old” ones:

duvosvit:

I agree with the idea and the slogan, but most likely I won't vote for the parties that are not in the parliament now but have “familiar faces” [among their candidates].

[…]

ot_taka_ja:

Voting for new [party] names isn't the same as voting for new people. But the idea is good. […]

There were some who planned to simply skip the vote:

gothic_inside:

I haven't been voting at all since 2003. And I don't regret it - it's a waste of time, and I'm just too lazy to go there to check the ‘against all' [square on the ballot].

And there were those who were going to vote against all candidates, an option available to Ukrainian voters:

gapusia:

I am for voting against all! The new ones do not have enough time [to gain impact], while the old ones should be in jail… Skipping the vote means showing [that you don't care], and then you don't have the right to be critical of those in power. But ‘against all' - that's a stance!

There is even an LJ community for Ukrainian ‘against all' voters - proty_vsih. LJ user chapeye asked this question (UKR) there on Oct. 9:

What's the difference?

Mathematically, politically, morally, etc.:

- to vote against all;
- to [skip the vote];
- to [leave with your ballot];
- to spoil the ballot with obscenities.

I'm serious. Is there a difference? […]

Here is one of the responses:

mrs_jk:

It's necessary to go for the sake of the turnout. Then it would be more difficult to falsify the vote, fewer chances for the radical marginals, more chances that the election would be valid.

‘Against all' - a way to declare your position. Basically, this wouldn't harm anyone, but it's one of the ways to express your protest.

Spoiling the ballot - the protest wouldn't be heard, because in the overall statistics it would be registered as nothing but spoiled and there'd be no way to tell if it happened accidentally or not. With the ‘against all' vote, it is definitely not accidental.

As for the third item, as far as I understand it, it's the same as not showing up for the vote. The only difference is that the commission members would have to fill out a missing ballot form, and it'd take them longer to do the count […].

In another post (UKR, RUS) in the proty_vsih LJ community, LJ user alex_rubanov wrote that he couldn't find the ‘against all' voting results from the previous election and asked whether these votes were being counted at all. LJ user dr_dick replied:

They count them :)))) They do count them :))) But they publicize [these results] somewhat reluctantly. And they are really not into commenting them :))))

It's growing by approximately one percent with each new vote since 2004.

I guess it was 1.7 [percent] in 2006, and 2.63 [percent] in 2007. I may be wrong about the fractions, can't say exactly from the top of my head. Let's overcome the [3-percent] voting barrier, while [we still can, while the ‘against all' option is still there].

I know the exact figure for the ‘against all' vote in Kyiv in 2007 - 4.44 percent. Nationwide, it was less.

Current TV's Collective Journalism program has started a series of video reports on how the rest of the world views the US. In The View from Over There, people from many different countries state their views on foreign policy, the war in Iraq, the situation with Iran and mention who they would want as the future president of the USA. The video interviews are sometimes in different languages, but all of it is subtitled in English.

This video also uses footage from other shows on the US Elections 2008, but this time concentrating on the foreign perspective. This is something Global Voices and Reuters have been doing for a while now at Voices Without Votes: gathering opinions from all over the planet on the US elections. If you have any posts you would like to submit to the site, you can do it here.

Current TV's next Collective Journalism assignment will be a worldwide view on the US immigration policies.

In Ecuador the reports of the National Institute of Statistical and Census (INEC) released today, show hopeful indexes, inflation decreased compared with last year's value for the same month of September (0.66% vs 071%). It seems President Correa doesn't have too much to worry about on this area, although nobody knows for sure how is he going to implement the changes approved in the recently passed Constitution. Other countries, however, haven't been as lucky. Today, even Sao Paulo, the largest financial center in Latin America, had to suspend its meetings twice, falling first by 10% and then 15%, closing to a lower 5.43%, Mexico lost 5.40%, Buenos Aires dropped 5.90%, Santiago -6.02% -4.86% Bogota and Lima sank (-9.27%).

Galo Chiriboga (Ecuador Mines and Oil Secretary) is concerned that oil prices are falling below 90 dollars and this could affect Ecuador and its plans to finance their all time waited reform. So far, the Constitutional reform is budgeted at 3.700 millions of dollars, though getting to that ammount will be far more difficult if oil prices fall below the $ 85 per barrel, which is the price set as a reference to estimate the 2009 Ecuadorian budget.

Looking outside of their borders, some bloggers in Ecuador are in doubt that the $700 million bailout will solve the global economical crisis the U.S.A has started. Joselias Sánchez Ramos of Dialogo con Joselias [es] (Talking to Joselias) jumps in and agrees that American crisis affects the whole world and particularly Latin America. He believes that there are some who will certainly benefit from this:

La crisis del mercado financiero estadoundiense pronto dominado por cuatro titanes que ofrecerán toda la gama de servicios financieros: Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup y Bank of America.

Omar Vargas of Cambiemos Ecuador [es] (Changing Ecuador) asks himself how different this intervention of the Federal Reserve in the U.S. is to the reactions under similar circumstances that took place in Ecuador back in 1999 and finds that it is no different. He also criticizes the bailout, stating that it will just strengthen the idea that no matter what financial obligations are acquired, how business is handled or money is invested, Uncle Sam will come and save the American's day. He concludes:

El salvataje hecho a AIG no debió haberse dado, pero la situación política (elecciones) los estándares morales y éticos equivocados y una ideología paternalista de los gringos a la larga producirán una crisis mayor en los EEUU y se extenderá a nivel global.

Another Ecuadorian blogger (also journalist and writer) , Rubén Dario Buitrón translates into Spanish and publishes in his blog the open letter written by Michael Moore. The heading he picked for re-publishing this letter, says it all: El salvaje salvataje en EE.UU [es] (The savage bailout in the U.S.)