2008 - YEAR IN REVIEW SO FAR

January - Oil hits record prices to go above the $100 threshhold, eventually peaking at $147.27 a barrel on July 11 March- Financial giant Bear Stearns collapseS on the backdrop of rumors, the credit crunch and a financially unstable market, only to be taken over by JP Morgan with the intervention of the Federal Reserve.

June - Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton steps out of the race to become President of the United States

June- Following months of violence and political bitterness, President Robert Mugabe, against international pressure, holds elections without the opposition MDC on the ballot

July- Iran continues to defy international pressure by pursuing its nuclear armament while its ally Hizbollah becomes more provocative in Lebanon and against Israel.

August- Michael Phelps becomes the fastest swimmer of all time

August- Russia and Georgia engage in a brief war over the rebel terrritories of South Ossetia and Abkhazia which causes tensions between Russia and the West

AN EYE FOR AN EYE?

Today, Israel buried 2 of its boys, Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev, giving closure to the families and the country as whole from the Lebanon War of 2006.

It seems as though, the accusation that one Israeli life is worth the lives of 100 Lebanese lives has been validated by none other than Hizbollah. It's actions over the past week have shown that its values one Jewish body for 100 Lebanese/Palestinian fighters and 5 murderers.

As Shlomo Goldwasser, Ehud's father, summed it up best:

"They sacrificed over 700 of their best warriors and all their economy, and what they get for what they did is a murderer, a bloody murderer of a three-and-a-half-year-old girl and her father - and for this they are making all this glory, for this they sacrificed so much. So I feel only pity for them."

Perhaps Hizbollah should rather take a page from Israel's book and embrace life instead of martyrdom. Until then, the media will always portray 1 Israeli life for 100 Lebanese - Hizbollah has set the currency.

SUMMER NIGHTS

Monday July 14^th - The Romantic city of lights, with the backdrop of the Bastille Day parade, set the scene for a historic meeting, where Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad would be under the same roof. But the impressions of the French capital, and the festive breeze of summer, failed to change the flirtations between the two countries into a romantic reconciliation.

Rather, the political overture in Paris played more to the tune of the musical Grease. The re-enactment of the encounter between Olmert and Assad, is a funny reminder to anyone who has had one of those awkward post-break-up meetings. Reuters gives a minute by minute account of the parade scene:

"Assad clearly considered it was too soon to shake hands, chat or even nod to Olmert.

As Olmert entered the main hall of the Paris Grand Palais, a Reuters photographer captured him casting glances toward the tall Syrian leader. But Assad turned away, raising one hand to his face as if to block off any eye contact with the Israeli.

The photograph sequence then shows Assad skirting the far wall, where interpreters sat in plexiglass booths, as Olmert turned to talk to another delegate."

Had the affair gone on any longer, Bashar would have whipped out his comb and leather jacket, pretending to be macho in front of Olmert (Sandy D). Although Israel and Syria have not had a romantic summer together, Assad’s mannerisms were like any high school boy, trying to avoid that date that went bad. Comical antics aside, perhaps the world needs less Danny Zuko’s and more leaders who can handle those awkward dates.

OSTRICHES ARE SITTING DUCKS
Mbeki’s denial of crises has defined his Presidency

Thabo Mbeki’s “I am an African” speech at the beginning of his term of office set the bar and aspirations of the nation. 9 years on from that speech, his smooth sophistication and economic idealism has fallen flat on an audience which is calling for his blood rather than an encore. Some have posted him as another leader trying to hang on to power in a Texas shoot-out with his upcoming rival Jacob Zuma. Of course there is a degree of credibility in such an assertion and some similarity with the Democratic presidential caucuses in America can be drawn.

At a time though, Mbeki seemed to be the perfect compromise. He is the visionary behind the African Renaissance, the pioneer of NEPAD and the reviver of the AU. With his clean cut silver beard, he has become the poster-model for African intelligentsia and the rising black-middle class without stepping on the "white man’s feet".

Yet, on the other hand, recent blunders in the entire Zimbabwean crisis – although naming it a crisis would be an understatement- and the failure of South Africa to rise to the challenge again and lead Africa in a united voice against poor governance and corruption, has eroded the very premise of an African Renaissance. But when one looks back even further, his government’s foreign policy, or lack thereof, with regards to Zimbabwe seems to bring about a repetitive and predicable pattern of his entire administration.

Whether it is Zimbabwe’s quiet diplomacy, the denial of HIV as a virus leading to AIDS, the denial of a potential energy crisis, crime and so on, Mbeki seems to have a hear no evil, see no evil policy which has defined his Presidency. He could stick his head in the sand and hope all these problems will go away but by doing so repetitively for so many years, Mbeki’s problems seemed to have hardened into a form called Jacob Zuma. From having his head in the sand for too long, Mbeki now seems to be stuck in the mud, and Zuma has a reaching shot at the Presidency.

LOST IN TRANSLATION
Translating Arab Sentiment about Israel

60 years after the miracle of the restoration of Jewish sovereignty and independence in the formation of the State of Israel, Palestinians still refer to this as “Al-Nakba”, meaning the catastrophe or disaster. Without diving too deeply into the historical dialects on the Arab/Israeli conflict, one thing about Arabic vocabulary seems to be perplexing. In 1948, the Arabs called the declaration of Israel’s Independence as Al-Nakba. Consequently, the Palestinians lost roughly half of the mandated land to Israel and this was a disaster to them.

In 1967, Israel whipped the Arab armies and conquered all of the remaining Palestinian territory. This, in Arabic is known as “an-Naksah” or the setback. But exactly was their setback? They lost everything. Surely the setback, in logical terms, would have been when they lost half of the land and the disaster should have been when they lost all of it? Under the current Arab logic, they say that, in 1948, the glass was completely empty when in fact it was half full. Conversely, they say that, in 1967, the glass was half empty when in fact is completely empty.

Perhaps Jimmy Carter is not the only guy who is lost in translation of Arabic? Or perhaps the only way to explain this illogical translation is that the Arab/Israeli conflict has never been about land but rather about the ‘Chutzpah’ of the Jewish nation standing up against Goliath.

PASS THE HAMAS AND TAHINA
Jimmy Carter fails to understand Middle Eastern Language

Jimmy Carter’s visit to the Middle East region has sparked a controversy over his meeting with Khaled Mashaal, or K Ma as he is known to the local paprazzi on the streets of Damascus. Apart from my own prejudices surrounding Carter’s visit, I was skeptical that anything could actually arise of the visit, except more legitimacy of Hamas as a political organisation. Then in a press conference, Carter announced that Hamas is willing to accept a pre-67’ Palestinian state. Instinctively, a gut reaction would be “that’s progress”. Unfortunately, this air of relief only remained in the gut as immediately after that K Ma added a small technical detail, a “hudna”, which is a ten year truce.

Lets just say that should Hamas get the pre-67 borders, they will not be hosting barbeques and siestas for that 10 year time out. Why would they? After all, the withdrawal from Lebanon and from Gaza didn’t bring peace but rather reinvigorated the militant struggle.

Peace in Hebrew is Shalom and in Arabic it is Salaam. Jimmy, I am afraid your definition of peace doesn’t sound remotely similar to the Hebrew or Arabic translation. Again, the word is lost in translation.

MACH 3 IS NO LONGER MILITANT

Fans of Mach 3 Gets Militant will notice that today marks a starting point that this blog will be re-inventing itself and evolving into a a new blog called Politics 2.0.

Readers can still expect the same rhetoric and posts that they have become accustomed to except it will be taken to another level now. Opinionated, humorous and independent, Politics 2.0 is the myspace of politics. From Downing Street to Bourbon Street, from the price of oil to the price of cooking oil, from the White house to your house, everything is connected. This blog merely connects the dots . It's world events, as seen on a street level. This is the future of politics.

EAGLES WITHOUT WINGS
Another missed opportunity to spread the Doctrine of Freedom

Press aides to President Bush have been reluctant to confirm whether he will or will not be attending the Beijing Olympic Games. White House press secretary Dana Perino commented this week that Bush "has been very clear that he believes that the right thing for him to do is to continue to press the Chinese on a range of issues, from human rights and democracy, political speech freedoms and religious tolerance, and to do that publicly and privately, before, during and after the Olympics." When pressed as to whether she could say if Bush will attend the opening ceremony, Perino said Wednesday, "I cannot."

Regardless of whether he goes now or does not, Bush has missed the boat in taking a leading role in boycotting the Beijing Olympics opening ceremony. Even Gordon Brown, who is not known to be the most eccentric of British PM’s, Nicholas Sarkozy and my girl Hillary Clinton have decided to boycott the opening ceremony in protest to China’s violent reaction to Tibet. Sources have confirmed that for financial reasons, Mach 3 has decided to involuntarily boycott the Olympics as well.

Bush is now stuck in a conundrum. If he decides to boycott, he will now be just another of those celebrity appearances catching onto a publicity wave. If he goes ahead to the games, then it will send a clear message that being friends with the Chinese is far more important than his doctrine of spreading freedom to the world. So facing this conundrum, Bush at present has decided not to do anything at all, which seems to be the pattern of this administration. Unfortunately, this ostrich in the sand approach of waiting for Dick, dad or Condi to make a choice does not work. Whatever decision or indecision Bush makes, this is another missed opportunity to advance the notion of freedom which has defined this Presidential term so far. Tibet, a peaceful nation, is the poster child for the cause of freedom. When it comes down to the Tachlis of it, “freedom fries” are just plain chips and the Doctrine of Freedom is merely a suggestion.

CZECH MATES

“We have tried to get the Russians to agree that we will participate as equals in a system designed to provide protection to the United States, Europe and Russia," U.S. National Security adviser Stephen Hadley commented on CNN on Thursday April 3, in support of NATO’s decision to back U.S. initiated defence shield in the Czech Republic. In response to Hadley’s remark, blogger Mach 3, who also goes by the alias Castor Troye commented, “What? Are you nuts?” in an undisclosed and unattended press conference.

Building a defence shield in the heart of Europe sends a clear and categorical message to say “everyone on this side of the line is on my team and everyone on the other side…well you didn’t make the cut”. Alluding to repressed childhood memories that we all have of not being picked for the team, the Bush administration has again enforced its For us or Against Us Doctrine where Russia, a country with an unsound history of mental hygiene, is that kid on field who again was left out of the team.

The return of drawing Cold War lines in Europe is not sudden or by accident. Only a year ago, Putin offered Bush the chance to place a missile defence system in the former USSR Republic of Azerbijan to curb the fear of nuclear missiles being launched from Iran and the Middle East region. In response, the U.S. stuck to its original plan and backtracked far from the Middle East to the Czech Republic, throwing cream pie in the Russians’ face. No doubt this is further exacerbated by the west’s wooing of Ukraine and Georgia to join NATO which sends a clear message that the west doesn’t trust Russia.

Instead of actively engaging in a new Russia, the U.S. administration has excluded them from jumping on board the new Europe idea which has forced the Russians to take the rebellious kid approach of being the macho man, anti-democratic, oligarchic stereotype which the Russians seem to enjoy. I guess such an effect is inevitable when the U.S. Sectrary of State is an expert on Soviet affairs, emphasis on Soviet.

Apart from returning the world into a bipolar system, the Czech line in the sand can have another repurcussion which is that Russia will form its own team and friends. After a slap in the face like that, is it unimaginable that Russia could warm up to Iran, the sworn enemy of the U.S.? I hope someone on either side of this translucent iron curtain has some degree of insight into the past and more importantly, some degree of foresight into the future.

THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE

American politics is a fascinating soap opera. Political careers are as resilient as Dynasty, and those 1980’s drama shows which ran for years, were. Indeed the Bush, Clinton monarchy which has defined U.S. bipartisanship for nearly 20 years is quite dynastical. But Washington, following the trend in Hollywood, could be moving towards reality dream shows such as the Obama phenomenon.

This guy is a hit, especially amongst the 70% of Americans who think the U.S is going in the wrong direction and some are even comparing him to the Kennedy of our times. But with his abstract promises of change, and his youthful cult-like following, there is something about him which doesn’t make him quite presidential.

When one looks beyond this phenomenon, things just don’t add up. Apart from the obvious facts that he shares his second name with a tyrant of the later 20^th Century, is son to his estranged Kenyan father, went to school in Indonesia, and was raised in Hawaii, he also lacks considerable experience. All these unspoken facts are building up an 800 pound gorilla in the room which no-one is talking about. Hillary picked this up in one of her debates and accused the press of wearing padded gloves when questioning Obama in press conferences.

Students, groupies and Obama fans queue for hours just to be swooned by one of his speeches. But as many live concerts and tours he might do, questions still remain. Who exactly is this guy? What is his connection to the convicted Chicagoan political fundraiser Tony Rezko and why did he not outright reject his Church minister’s award to Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam and a known anti-Semite and racist, who has entices hatred. When it comes down to it, what does he mean by hope and change which is as abstract as Bush’s doctrine of freedom?

Besides, if he were to become President, America will be returning to a typical political swing which Obama supposedly wants to end. His record is as liberal as Ted Kennedy’s. In response to the conservative administration, he may be resorting to a pendulum swing towards the far left which in turn will have conservative backlash in the midterms. So much for the end of bipartisanship!

Whether she wins or loses, Hillary is the balance to the pendulum and the safe bet to the impulsive and “pop” support of Obama. Ironically, the people voting for her are women over 65 and the unemployed which are the same people who watch daytime soap operas.

A SUMMER TO REMEMBER...
A Look at the American 2008 Elections in the last days of the Civilisation's Summer

The study of civilizations shows a cyclical and repetitive pattern which historian Max Dimont describes as the spring, summer, fall and winter periods. In the spring, a civilization emerges with new concepts. By summer, it peaks and by fall, it becomes tied to the materialism on which it peaked, leading to an eventual decline into winter.

Contrary to Shakespearean theatre, the winter of discontent was not in Elizabethan England, but was rather in 20^th century Great Britain (which ironically was another Elizabethan era). While the sun set on the British empire, the spring of opportunity emerged across the Atlantic to usher in the 20^th century as the American century.

Now that the American century is over, is this century the fall of the American empire? Has the summer of liberty and economic freedom finally come to an end? No doubt the undisputed title of the United States as leader of the world is now somewhat disputed. It is a world in which traditional values of democracy and freedom are being replaced by new and non-absolute ideas.

It is a meshed world where China is now capitalist, terrorists are now elected officials and Kyoto is no longer just a place in Japan. And it seemed for a time under the Bush administration that American principles of freedom and liberty were becoming too vague for a world that has changed since 1776.

With terrorism, the war in Iraq and a lack of leadership on climate change and global affairs, the autumn leaves are beginning to fall on Washington. Doubts over the future of America have lead to what some have called ‘a broken-government’.

But with the 2008 election, unlike the hopeless 2004 one, there is an air of hope again and the candidates reflect a need for change in a world that is always changing. The material aspirations of the American dream and the polar opposites of Church and State, individual and government, environment and economy, no longer fit the rest of the world’s definitions of success. Policies of unilateralism, denial of climate change and stereotypes of Texan oil tycoons have done little to ease this.

From Obama to Clinton to McCain, the excitement of their campaigns and the enthusiasm of the electorate show that the next election is a do or die pitch for a future in which America keeps the lead, through adaptation and innovation. While the race will be closely contested, the real winner here will be the American electorate and the idea that democracy is strong and can adapt. The candidates are out on the streets, citizens are canvassing outside subway stations. The leaves might be falling on Washington, but no-one is ready to say ‘the summer affair is over’.