ATTENTION MONSIEUR OBAMA

In an interview with the French magazine Paris Match and the cable channel
Canal +, Barack Obama praises the leadership of Nicolas Sarkozy the French President. Barack Obama thinks that he is an energetic man and that he is an example of leadership for other leaders around the world.
There is no discussion that Sarkozy is energetic and dynamic. But one has to see further than that especially when people think of you as the Camelot’s new knight (Washington Post 01/29/2008). You can be dynamic, criss-cross the country; you can visit factories or police stations that does not mean that you solve problems. I don’t care if a leader is dynamic or not. The job of a politician is to solve the problems not only talk about it.
So far Sarkozy has spoken more often than he has actually solved the problems of la belle France is facing. I do not know what exactly Obama has found with Sarkozy, but this is a man who asks the French people to make sacrifices and in the meantime went on vacation in Egypt and then in Petra (Jordan) in very luxury hotels the last Christmas.

Barack Obama said that he does not accept the money from lobbies to finance his campaign, so I guess that he will not borrow their private jets or yachts either. Fair enough. But Monsieur Obama the guy that you seem to admire with his new approach of politics is the man who goes on vacation with the private jet of Vincent Bolloré, an important French businessman. He borrows also sometimes his yacht. It is another French businessman who paid his last summer vacation in Wolfsborough (USA).

Sarkozy was supposed to give French people something called “Change” (sounds familiar?).
In a press conference few weeks ago he announced that he could not do anything about the purchasing power of the French and in the same conference he announced that the relation with his Italian former model turned pop singer girl friend was serious. Another example of “new leadership” is when he went to Africa in Senegal not long after his election to give a speech that many considered racist.
By the way the next time Obama wants to give his opinion about a leader, he should have a look at the latest opinion poll, as a matter of fact Sarkozy is more and more unpopular with his own people.

With this kind of faux-pas or if it is the kind of leadership Senator Obama you are admiring and looking forward to exercise, I would rather vote (if I was an American) for Hillary Clinton or the Republican nominees McCain or Romney( he is already a millionaire, I am sure that he won’t borrow the private jet or the swimming pool of a fellow businessman.)

WAR IN CONGO

The war in Congo is killing almost 45000 people every month (The Guardian, 22/01/2008) .The war has so far killed more than 3 million people. It is the deadliest conflict in human history since World War 2. However we live in a world which does not care about it, because it is blacks who are killing each other. As a matter of fact the conflict in Darfur- do not get me wrong, the killings there are unacceptable- attracts much more media attention. But it is different, because some Arabian tribes are killing Black Africans tribes. Furthermore the underground is full of oil.
There are also lot of natural resources in Congo; unfortunately one can extract the resources in a war zone without problems. The sites are secure with very well armed guards. As I watched a report on CNN international the other day, the government or its representatives on the ground are corrupted. Of course the companies which extract the minerals pay some taxes but not what they should pay. Besides the workers are underpay and work in conditions close to that of their ancestors 100 years ago. I can’t imagine what is like being injured in those mines in a remote area in Congo. They have no access to modern hospitals. And even if some infirmaries or hospitals exist they do not have the money to pay the treatments. The world is not really involved because it is a very complex situation. But by the way involvement does not mean solutions at the end. Look at the Israelian-Palestinian conflict. People get involved but no results so far.
So the situation is much more complex in Congo. It has to do with colonisation, bad governance, corruption, and natural resources. We can also include different ethnic groups who hate each other, and a huge market for weapons smugglers. They play an explosive role in the conflict. The truth is we are all guilty at some point of this. As a matter of fact some of the minerals which are extracted in Congo are being used in electronic components. And do not forget the environment, the warriors in this area are also animal smugglers and they are decimating species such as elephants. They killed them with bazookas. How funny is that?
But I am optimistic. The Congo is independent since the sixties. Some countries or continents like Europe were in war for centuries. People seem sometimes to forget their own bloody and violent history, especially in Europe. That is not a reason of course to do nothing to stop this stupid war.

STOLEN GENERATION

The premier of Tasmania has announced yesterday that the stolen generation victims will share $5 million from the Tasmanian government. (The Australian)
So far the federal government has refused to compensate that tragedy with money. However Kevin Rudd the new prime minister of Australia has pledged that he will apologised to Aborigines for all the suffering the white men did to them.
What is the stolen generation? I recommend a wonderful book and a movie based on the book. ”Follow the Rabbit-Proof” fence by author Doris Pikington Garimara and the movie is Rabbit-proof fence from director Phillip Noyce ( The Bone Collector, The Saint).
The stolen generation is all the mixed race children (usually from an Aborigine mother and a White father) who were removed from their families by the Australian government. The authorities wanted to assimilate the children in an all white Australian society, because anyway the” Aborigines were supposed to disappear”.

The question is can the Australian government compensate so much suffering with money? I am not in position to judge, I am not a stolen generation victim. The Tasmanian premier said:” "No amount of money can make up for Aboriginal children being removed from their families simply on the basis of race," (the Australian 22/01/08). Sure. But I know that the federal government will not follow the example of Tasmania because I think if they accept to compensate the “Stolen generation”, what about all the Aborigines people?
But in Australia change comes from the legal system. Last year the Supreme Court of Western Australia has granted rights in some large lands to Aborigines in this state. And in 1992, in the Mabo versus Queensland case the High Court of Australia made irrelevant the terra nullius concept. It meant that before this judgment the Australian government did not recognize that before the White man came in Australia, the Aborigines were already there.

But it is a hard question that the Australian government has to think about, if they have to compensate the Aborigines? And it is the same question with the American government, does it have to compensate Native Americans for all the suffering they endured and the dispossession of their lands? And what about African-Americans and their deportation from Africa and their work in cotton fields? Is compensation the only way to apologize? And why asking the taxpayer to pay for something he has nothing to do with? Why someone will receive some money from some work he never did but his ancestors actually did. I have no answers to these tricky questions, but we can think about it.

Bill Clinton, the Hillary’s barker

William Jefferson Clinton is one of the best President the USA never have, a very intelligent and charismatic leader of the 20th-century. He is admired around the world.
He did everything he could to bring peace between Israelis and Palestinians. He made a powerful speech in Gore Island (Senegal) which was a slave depot during the 18th century; he said:
"From Gore and other places Africa's sons and daughters were taken through the door of no return, never to see their friends and families again. America's struggle to overcome slavery and its legacy forms one of the most difficult chapters of that history. Yet, it is also one of the most heroic, a triumph of courage, persistence, and dignity. The long journey of African-Americans proves that the spirit can never be enslaved."
It is in Uganda that he apologized for the slave trade. Bill Clinton is also remembered as the first President to visit Vietnam since the war between the two countries ended. He lifted the embargo and restored the diplomatic relation between the two countries.
At home when he left the Office the economy was strong, the unemployment rate was low. The US had a federal budget in balance and even in surplus.
He left the Washington with much more experience than he had when he came into the White House. Still young and energetic he created the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation dedicated to "promotes the values of fairness and opportunity for all".
With few resources, volunteers, donations and his relations within the States and the World, he is succeeding in his fight in against HIV/AIDS. His foundation is treating or help to treat around 800 000 people in 71 countries. Bill Clinton is also involved in the fight against climate change.
Now here is the snag. His wife has decided to run for President of the US. Nothing wrong here except that if she gets the democratic nomination and gets elected President and re- elected, the United States the most powerful democracy in the World would have been under the Bushes and Clintons 28 years( 4 for Bush 41, 8 for Bush 43, 8 for Clinton 42, 8 for Clinton 44, do the math!).
That is not healthy for the ideals of a Republic. And who knows after Hillary the US would elect Jeb Bush, brother of George W. for eight more years, the time for Chelsea Clinton to be ready and so on...
But Hillary Clinton cannot be discriminate because she is the wife of a former President. As John Kennedy said when he appointed his brother as Attorney General “why should we discriminate someone because he is my brother?” Indeed, Robert Kennedy made a very talented and competent Attorney General and some even said that he was the real vice president .And in 1968 he would have won the Democratic nomination fair and square, but someone or some people decided to stop him.
So back to Bill Clinton who is doing everything he can to get his wife elected. He owes her so much. She stood up with him to the attacks when he needed her the most. During his campaign in 1992, she helps him to focus because she is a disciplined woman. Despite his many infidelities, Hillary stayed. Despite the supreme humiliation of the Monicagate she stayed. By calculation or by resignation or just because she loved him, she stayed.
Until the result of the Iowa Caucus Bill Clinton criticised Barack Obama in a fair ton, said that he was too young, too inexperienced, that he had to wait. His turn will come. But everything changed when Barack Obama won the first caucus. The best symbol of change as he called Obama on the Charlie Rose show relegated his dear wife, the best agent of change at a distant third place. Since then he has been hammering Obama in a deeply "depressing way" as Donna Brazile the former Al Gore campaign’s manager pointed out. He misquoted Obama on his opposition to the war, saying that actually he has never been really against it. Truth is that the junior Senator opposed the war since the very beginning, but once the troops were in Iraq, he decided to temper his critiques. Another example is when he angrily accused the Obama campaign in Nevada to threaten some of Hillary’s supporters in front of him and his daughter Chelsea. This is a presidential campaign, this is politics, it is tough and it is normal. Except that the guy we are talking about is Bill Clinton. The same guy who did great things in US, Senegal, Bosnia or Vietnam. Why did he become so aggressive? What is wrong with you Bill? Let's imagine that Barack Obama becomes the democratic nominee, how could he comes before the American people and say look, I am going to vote for this guy, he is the best candidate??!!! Who are you kidding Bill? This is someone who is supposed to unite a country and who is now ready to tear apart his own party. Come down Bill, you are better than what you are doing now.