Debating the debate - America and us
Time was when we needed to rely on the good offices of the United States Information Service to watch a US Presidential debate. Being able to watch it from the confines of your own living room courtesy satellite television is something different. You can laugh all you want.

There was a cartoonist who came on air after the Bush-Kerry debate was done last Friday morning. When he was asked how the debate went, he said "well, it just confirms what everyone knows, which is that George W. Bush is stupid.'' I laughed out so loud, the neighbours came rushing-in to see what was wrong..

It's a debate that was centered around foreign affairs, and there was no mention of Israel or Palestine in the entire 90 miniutes of its duration. The leader of the "free world'' (!!) was perpetually stuck on two sentences. "It's all a lot of hard work,' he said. "My opponent changes positions -- what kind of message does that send our allies?'' he parroted.

Everyone who watched the debate should have been inclined to agree with the cartoonist. Kerry shone by comparison, although he was not devastating. As a Vietnam-war veteran, we suppose he would have been brought-up to suffer fools gladly.

He did not nail Mr Bush, for instance on the farcical idea that he (Kerry) is "giving the wrong message to our allies'' by claiming that the war on Iraq was ''the wrong war, at the wrong time in the wrong place.''

Mr Kerry did not say that his intention is not to fight the war with the help of the "allies'' but to get the US troops out of Iraq as soon as he possibly can do it. "I do not want to fight a war that I said was wrong" he did not say. "A wrong war should not be fought with or without allies,'' he could have said. "All I want is to get the hell out of there.''

But we did not hear him say anything of that sort. Not a word was said in the debate about the plight of the Iraqi children and wretched Iraqi citizens who are caught up in a prolonged war with no end in sight, unless the US troops pull out and let the Iraqis sort out their own affairs.

Now, in my mind, unconstrained as I was about the need to look over my shoulder to see if US Information Service officers are hovering about, a few things are becoming clearer. The two candidates who are debating each other while they both entertain the prospect of becoming the most powerful man on earth -- are both, not very smart people.

One was very simply dismissed by a cartoonist soon after the program as being plain stupid. The news anchor who interviewed the cartoonist (let me try to recall here -- his cartoon is titled the Contrairan, I think) was not at all comfortable with this business of the President being called "stupid'.'' He tried to suggest that perhaps you could say the President was "inarticulate'' but not stupid.

But the cartoonist was nonchalant. He kept on the message. He said "the President is stupid. Everybody knows that, they are just not saying it.'' But between two men who want the most powerful job in the world, the choice seemed to be one between one who was inarticulate if not stupid, and the other who was relatively articulate. Not much help there for the American people.

Not much help for globally concerned citizens either. There was only one point in the entire debate when either of the two candidates seemed to display at least some measure of empathy for the rest of the world, and that was when Kerry said that he believes in the right to engage in pre-emptive strikes, but would in fact resort to them only if the "global conditions are met.'' For this minor concession to the rest of the world, he was thoroughly panned on television with an independent analyst suggesting that this was "the low point of the debate'' even though everyone was saying that Kerry has won the debate.

There can be no flip-flop about it, Kerry had won the day. But from a man (Kerry) who had said that he feels the Americans are "occupiers'' there was no outright concession forthcoming that he thinks the war is stupid, and that he plans to get the American troops 'the hell out of there' as soon as he can. From an American President, we cannot expect that such a pullout will be on the day after he wins the election; but at least he could have countered the Bush manthara that "this is no way to win out allies'' by simply countering - "yes it is the wrong war, which is why I want to get out of there, as soon as I can stabilise the situation somewhat. To hell with the allies.''

Kerry then said things like "you can be certain but wrong,'' and "we have to be strong but also smart.'' That was very upbeat and clever, but it needs to be said that it is not difficult to shine when you are situated next to the patina of an unpolished shoe. With Bush around, anything will glow….

The trouble is that there was a distinct impression being created that two untalented or at least relatively mediocre men are running for the office of the President of the strongest nation on earth. Which of course leaves room for one conjecture - - which is that the US Presidency is eventually for the most part run by the system.

The American system, the American "core values''' are not decided ultimately by George Bush or his right wing coalition. American Chief Executives might decide the gradations of and variations of America's global policy, but the policy itself remains focussed and pre-determined. There seems to be a debate going on in the Sri Lankan journals at the current moment whether American forces are motivated by the need to "control shipping lanes for economic reasons'' or whether they are motivated to maintain the balance of power in the smallest regions and sub-regions on the planet.

But in fact, there is no debate - - nor a need for one. America wants to maintain the balance of forces in its favour, damned right -- but not as an end in itself, but for deep going reasons of economic hegemony. It's an elemental consideration. A tough wants to be a tough, and if so his notoriety must be known in every alley. Sure, he just gets an incidental kick out of displaying his tattoos. His notoriety must be maintained -- because that's the reason his protection money can be ratcheted up, and charged to his victims The back-room chatter of course will be how he maintains his image as a blackguard. In the galleries, they will talk about his every karate chop and the shape and size of all his daggers. In the process, almost unbeknownst to the chatterer, he has earned enough protection money for seven generations plus ten molls….

Phew, one might as well say. What a way to end an article. But we are talking here in the afterglow of the John Kerry-George Bush debate.

Back to Top

Back to Columns

Copyright © 2001 Wijeya Newspapers Ltd. All rights reserved.