Does the media have an effect on elections?

The media can have an influence on the voters if they choose to campaign against or for a candidate. Although there are those who argue that the media not political leaders call the shots in the UK as there are those who Martin Kettle of The Guardian argues the media has limited sway .

There are the media that focus just on the errors or the ignorance of a candidate. This happened, for example, during the last presidential elections in France when the press cited the blunders of the presidential candidate Segolene Royal like her saying Afghanistan was still ruled by the Taliban.

In countries, where the media is state controlled, the opposition has limited access to radio and television to air its view. The voters are exposed to propaganda rather than to campaigning per se.

As the media has a great influence, the candidates should be careful about every word they pronounce and should be on constant alert to respond to articles and comments against them.

Now the internet has become a powerful tool for campaigning, the candidates have to be more aggressive in their approaches to counter-attack disparaging views. It’s all a matter of communication skills and strategies that can make a candidate look smart or dumb.

Should people be forced to vote?

Voting should be considered as a part of national duty. Not to vote means being unable to take a stand on issues or to be acquiescent about the policies undertaken by those in charge. It also means a sign of public protest when the turnout is very low.

However there is no way to force people to vote if they don’t want to as it amounts to forcing them to choose between candidates or policies they don’t care about. What matters is to have transparent elections reflecting the will of those who choose to vote. In any society, there are people who are born to lead and others who are born lo be led. There are passive as there are active citizens. There are those for whom whatever policy won’t make a difference as the system remains the same regardless of the apparent new approaches.

Making voting compulsory means forcing people to choose a direction among others. In dictatorial regimes, people vote out of fear of being persecuted and the percentage of approval varies from 99.99% to 100%.. In this case not to vote has more significance than voting because it amounts to challenging those who seek to stay in power by whatever means and elections become just a formality to “legitimize” their stay in power.

In some countries people aren’t forced to vote but they are bribed by candidates to vote for them. The one who can give more money is the most likely to win. In such a case elections become just a sham. People cast their vote out of “gratitude” for the “generosity” of the candidate and not because of a plan to serve them.

Elections can have credibility if they are carried out transparently and aren’t like a carnival season in which there are parades, dances and banquets or at worst, they are periods of violence. The most violent and intimidating party secures the winning votes.

In such a case, abstaining from voting is a way to stay clean and not to be embroiled in a corrupt system that legitimises its victory through mean methods that make fool of those who put their trust in the candidates only to find that they were used by them to secure a comfortable post at the expense of the deprived.

$700 billion bail out, taxpayers concerns and saving the economy

There is an argument that the cost of the bailout should be weighed against the cost of a bust.

Does this mean the US, in case of a bust, should be welcome to the Third World Club? It remains to ask who will benefit from US economic difficulties, will it be China who will jump on US markets abroad?

It seems that for the US government the bailout is a matter of life or death. As a powerful country with a very ramified economy, it will be unthinkable that it will ask for international help to phase out its current troubles. This seemingly economic tsunami is unlike Katrina disaster which make the USA for the first time in its history to accept international aid to cope with it. The US economy to save itself and the economies of other countries need restructuring at every major financial institutions for them to go regularly smoothly, creating benefits and not not unsustainable losses.

The issue of bailing out banks will certainly hit the tax payers as the money needed for social projects will be channeled into banks that in the first place let things go wrong.

The bailout should be the last surgery to save a sector from a chronic situation that is likely to affect the rest of the world, knowing that the US economy counts 20% of the international trade. Otherwise a global crisis will spread like fire hitting the US economy and other economies beyond.

Perhaps there should be a mechanism by which the government can retrieve the $700 billion when the bailed out banks return to a healthy state. It won’t make sense that banks will continue to have a pat on the back each time they are in trouble instead of a slap on the hand each time they go knowingly go wrong. Taxpayers don’t just have the right to know where their money goes but the right to ave their say on how it should be spent.

This issue is surely a big headache for Obama and McCain in this presidential election period. It’s the biggest test for them to show the voters to what extent they can be up to big challenges.

Is it immoral to be very rich?

Being rich is better than being poor. There is no limit to how much money a person can have in a liberal economy. But acquiring money also entails responsibilities towards one’s country and the financial markets. There are many who get rich through dubious means like engaging in illicit activities (drugs, smuggling etc.) There are those who resort to tax evasion , the exploitation of the workers and the monopoly of the market to fix their own prices.

However there are laudable rich people who get clean money and use it for the welfare of the needy. The best example is Bill Gates who decided to quit his executive post at Microsoft and to dedicate his vast fortune to help poor people.

It doesn’t make sense to curb people’s ability to make as much money as they can but it also doesn’t make sense to let financial institutions get out of control leading to an economic collapse affecting both the rich and the poor. What is needed is a vision that can lead to the general prosperity and not an excessive greed that leads to the downfall of the perpetrators and those linked to them directly and indirectly.

Should America to the world’s policeman?

|The US needs to look as a partner with the rest of the world and not as a big brother using sticks and carrots to implement its policies vis-à-vis foes and friends. The world needs states that treat each other on equal footing and not on the basis of domineering.

If the US continues to have too many interventions, it may get political allies around the globe but at the same this will generate into increasing resentment towards its policies. Even in the rest of the West, people are resentful of the US because of its policies to make the world turn according to its agenda.

Its military power now guaranteeing it to be the world’s policeman is just increasing the race for arms among the other emerging powerful countries, particularly China and Russia. This will end by each emerging military power seeking to have its own carrefours to police.

The question that remains is whether the US can police all the hot spots of the world without over-stretching its army and budget or it will have selective policing by turning a blind eye to what is going on in areas it considers of less strategic importance.

On Thabo Mbeki’s resignation

Thabo Mbeki has done a good thing by opting to resign in an apparent move to pave the way for a new leadership. His years in power were disappointing as South Africa failed to redress many urgent problems like poverty, violence and unemployment.

South Africa needn’t any severe power struggle leading it to a situation similar in Zimbabwe that has put it far behind.

He will be remembered as being soft with Mugabe or rather supportive of his policy as he didn’t use South Africa’s economic and political influence to force him to conduct fair elections. He’s gone but he left Mugabe in power, who will remain a problem for the new South Africa president if he doesn’t respect the deal he has signed with the opposition.

It remains how the new president, expectedly Jacob Zuma, can turn a new page and put South Africa on the right track. Otherwise there can be no real changes but just change of faces.

Is it ever justified to kill civilians?

Historically, the civilians have been the victims of military raids. The First and the Second World Wars were events in which millions of civilians died due to indiscriminate raids on cities.

Despite the international conventions to protect civilians, there are many military operations that can’t be halted because of the civilians in the conflict zones.

But there is no justification to deliberately kill civilians as they shouldn’t in any way be the principal target of an armed operation. However there is no guarantee that in a massive operation they can all be protected, especially when it involves heavy weapons or air raids.

The killing of civilians is another price for wars, whose aim is to hit the targets and to destroy the enemy. After the fact, there is regret and compensation of the relative of the victims. Which means that there is no justification to kill civilians whose lives are gratuitously lost due to errors or deliberate targeting.

Rewarding leaders who are losers

The events following the respective elections in Kenya and Zimbabwe shows that elections should reflect the will of the people and not that of the leaders for whom elections are just a façade to stay in power.

Leaders with common sense should be ready for victory and defeat and not to feel defiant when winning or to call for violence when losing. It’s all a matter of playing a fair game for the benefit of the country and not for personal benefit.

The drawback of the rulers in Africa is that when they get grip of power they create an oligarchy through which they try to stifle all sorts of opposition. Their weapon is repression.

The examples of Zimbabwe and Kenya show it is just a waste of lives, opportunities and time to fail to settle the results of an election fairly. There is no harm in power sharing for the sake of a country. The greatest harm is when political differences generate into violence setting the country backward and making any national reconciliation hard to achieve without concession and international mediation.

The hope is that Zimbabwe will raise from its current fall in dire economic difficulties and that all the Zimbabweans can benefit from the wealth their renewed economy can afford.

Is the world safer after 9/11?

9/11 remains a turning point in modern history. It has put on alert the rest of the world, especially countries with close ties with the USA. Terrorism has struck all the corners of the world, mainly in Europe, the Middle East and North Africa.

For Morocco, the terrorist attacks on May 16th , 2003 in Casablanca was a wakeup call to have a stand against all forms of terrorism. Terrorism was viewed as something happening just in troubled parts of the world like Iraq and Afghanistan.

It’s evident that the consequences of these attacks made the authorities revise their security policies and arrest those suspected of involvement in future planned attacks.

However, Morocco is safer now as it has pre-emptive security operations to surround suspected terrorist cells. But it has also to remain vigilant as the threat can come from its borders with Algeria where the Al Qaeda is successful in mounting deadly terrorist attacks at least once a year.

Morocco is lucky, in that it doesn’t have armed groups as it is the case in Algeria, ready to mount battles even with the army. The Moroccans in their majorities have no sympathy for radical Islam that will do nothing but fetter their personal freedom.

In general, as long as governments all over the world don’t cooperate, despite their political differences, terrorism will find a safe haven, especially in areas known for their political instability like Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia.

What can eradicate support for terrorist groups in Muslim countries is the eradication of poverty and ignorance about the real message of Islam. If not, support for Al Qaeda and the like will be used as a means to express protest and hope for the “best”.

Listen to BBC World Have Your Say show on this subject.

Get this widget | Track details | eSnips Social DNA

Defining nationality

Nationality means belonging to a country and being proud of it despite its shortcomings. It means having a sense of identity through it and contrasting it with other nationalities for tolerance and not bigotry.

Perhaps the most exposed to the question of defining their nationalities are the immigrants who keep their link to their country of origin although the country where they have settled treat them as full nationals. There are also those who have double nationality and find it a dilemma which side to take when there is a conflict between the countries whose nationality they held.

Deep down one defines one’s nationality through a region in the country one belongs to. It’s through it that one sees his true identity.

Nationality is necessary. Without it, people will have little to link them. It is through it that they adapt to values and try defend and live by them.

Should Russia be isolated?

It will be difficult for the West to isolate Russia considering its emerging economic and military influence. Its recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent states is a response to NATO expansion in its neighbouring states and to thwart Georgia’s attempt to become a new military base for NATO.

The West should contend with the fact that Russia is back on its feet after the end of the communism which left it look powerless in face of the US foreign policy in Europe by heading the NATO military intervention in ex-Yugoslavia and by invading Iraq.

Russia still has other cards to play against the West by standing by Iran and thwarting any further Security Council sanctions against it. It may also enhance its nuclear cooperation with it to reduce US influence in the Middle East.

The West should recognize Russia as a power. It’s not like other small states that can be easily crushed just through economic embargoes, leaving them to fight for their lives. Russia is a bear. Once out of its hibernation, it won’t hesitate to show its paws to those coming in its way.

China Olypmic Games and political aftermath

It was evident that the political issues in China that were widely publicised prior to to the Olympic Games melted as the games were proceeding. the majority of people following the games were interested in their countries’ participation.

China proved able to make the games a success. It came top of winning gold medals, ousting the USA as the first country to win gold medals. There were little reports of protests. Perhaps the world attention was towards the events in Georgia, raising the fear of kindling cold war between Russia and the West, especially NATO members.

The games were moments of glory for many countries and China provided the opportunity for them to show their best.

The Olympic Games were ironically a cover hiding the hot issues in China like the situation in Tibet and human rights. The glamour of the games charmed the majority. But as the games are now over, China still has to improve its image with the rest of the world as it has to improve the living standard of its citizens in terms of income and the exercise of their human rights.

Cosmetic surgery, a body mutiliation?

Cosmetic surgery is becoming the vogue even in very conservative countries like Iran: .The most tempted to have a cosmetic surgery are women. Men don’t care if they have a big nose or a big mouth. For them resorting to it is more feminine than masculine, especially when it comes to facial surgery.

In the end what matters is not having a perfect look but a sense of self-esteem and confidence.
People who can’t afford a cosmetic surgery should learn to live with their look. What matters is to have a healthy body and not a good looking body that has to suffer because of ongoing surgeries just for the sake of a good look that can add nothing to one’s position in society or performance at work.

US projected future population distribution and political consequences

Historically there were worries among some Anglo –Saxon Protestants when Kennedy was the first Catholic US president. What can make the US different or the same in the future are the ideas held by the majority of its people. As long as the Americans hold to the constitution which guarantees the rights of everyone, there is little chance of national split because of a change in racial majority. The whites may stop being a majority in 2042, but this doesn’t mean the majority will drop the American values.

What is predicted is that the US won’t be the same in 2042 as in 33 years from now other countries will emerge as economically and politically more powerful, especially China and India. The Americans should learn to adjust from now on to the possibility that they can no longer be a superpower, but as a powerful nation with people from different parts of the world who can live in harmony among themselves and with the rest of the world.

Strength and weakness in international policy

The strength of a party doesn’t consist just in the means it has but in the successful tactics it can use. The US huge army in Iraq was disastrously faced by suicide attacks from the insurgents. Hamas despite its relatively primitive missiles is causing concern to Israel which has one of the most modern army in the world.

Wars as it seems aren’t the ultimate means to solve conflicts as they lead just to more disasters without radically solving standing issues. It’s better to engage in negotiations that can lead to enduring peaceful settlements. Using one’s strength to wipe out one’s enemy is a futile attempt, especially if the enemy has the means to resurrect and the problems just lay dormant before erupting with huge intensity.

Also, as long as there are divisions between (strong) nations, factions/ militias will be used to start new conflicts. The skirmishes and wars in southern Lebanon between Israel and Hezbullah were just proxy wars to avoid direct confrontations between Syria and Israel.
In the case of Georgia, Russia is sending a signal to the USA in case it seeks to include it in NATO. So the situation in Georgia is a test for Russia to confront US planned military expansion in the Caucasus region.

Has AIDS hijacked the world health agenda?

All the dangerous diseases should be tackled rigorously to ensure general health. AIDS gets such a large attention and funding because it is easier to transmit than some other contagious diseases. One AIDS carrier can transmit the disease to hundreds of promiscuous people through sexual relations.

In some countries in Africa ,like South Africa, there are millions of AIDS carriers, which should be seen as a time-bomb if this disease isn’t tackled seriously as it can lead to the wiping out of a very large portion of the population if kept unchecked and without publicity about its danger.
Malaria can be the cause of the natural atmosphere surrounding its victims.

For AIDS, it’s in most part man’s own doing either because of being ignorant or careless about it. Those who are suffering now from AIDS should get all the necessary treatment. For other illness like TB and malaria there should be more funds to tackle them. It’s not healthy to let one disease spread to tackle another one. When it comes to health, there is no choice but to tackle all diseases according to their dangers and not the funds allocated to them.

Should women stay at home?

It’s an ideal that women should stay at home to take care of their children, but this can’t be possible without a price as they are going to be denied the opportunities they can get through work.

Today it is becoming increasing rare for a woman in a developed country to be financially dependent on her husband. In developing countries, many male workers and civil servants who have a low income prefer to marry a working woman to cover financial needs.

The other changes concerning women is that a lot of them are now single mothers. It will be impossible for many of them to stay at home, as they need a job to take care of their children.
It’s up to women to choose which is best for them, to be full-time mothers or part-time workers to come to terms with the financial needs to raise a family.

Can discrimination be justified?

Can discrimination be justified?

There is no excuse for discrimination for whatever reasons. People should be judged on their merits, not class, race or colour. Using criteria to exclude types of people from mixing with the rest is a form of segregation and tribalism.

There is a difference between creating a club in which conditions must be met for membership, provided they aren’t explicitly discriminatory in a manner that violates the law, and offering jobs or selling property which clearly excludes types of people because of their colour, race or religion.

People as groups or individuals have the right to be distinct by creating associations or clubs, but there is nothing right with basing it on illegal and universally unacceptable discrimination.

Have the Olympic Games made the world blind to human rights records in China

The Olympic Games should be seen as a sport event that transcends all forms of politics. It’s not public protests that can deter the Chinese authorities from pursuing their current human records that are subject to criticism from human rights organisations. The OG should be seen as a moment of celebrations that should be separated from political issues.

The Chinese government was sent loud messages about its policy in Tibet and other parts of China leading to the disruption of the Olympic torch in Europe and the USA, which forced the organisers to change its avenues, but this didn’t force the Chinese to change the avenues of their policies.

As such, the Olympic Games are an occasion to give worldwide publicity about unresolved issues, but the OG should be left within their spirit. The focus should be on clean competition without doping. If the OG succeed in instilling the spirit of fairness among the competitors and the spectators, this should be an achievement. Seeking to change the world thanks to a short- lived event amounts to utopia. To be realistic, let’s enjoy the OG, which are a special occasion for all qualified sportsmen. Let politics be tackled in a different avenue and time.

How impotent is the United Nations

The United Nations is just forum for debates while action is carried out by countries that can bypass its resolutions. It has just the power of recommendations and condemnations in face of complex problems as in the Middle East.

The UN has historically proven its inability to establish peace without the accord of the parties concerned. Its peacekeeping forces have been defied on many occasions as during 2006 summer war between Hezbullah and Israel.

What is needed is that nations within their borders and with their neighbours should live in peace without provocation. Currently, many unresolved conflicts are internal as it is the case in Sudan, Sri Lanka, Ivory Coast and DR Congo. The UN can do little to solve these conflicts if the parties concerned can’t find permanent solutions to the core of their problems.

However, the UN despite its failure to resolve long-standing problems in some areas like Darfur has had some success in other areas like East Timor. The world can be worse without it. If it can’t solve all political problems, at least, it limits their worsening at a larger scale.

The UN should reshape itself to have more credibility by cleaning its house and by having a more balanced Security Council. It should make its past scandals from child sexual abuse of its peacekeeping forces, fund embezzlement to arming militias. Among other things, the Security Council needs restructuring. Its current permanent members were the consequence of political powers that existed when it was founded more than 60 years ago. It’s unfair that emerging powerful countries like India remain excluded from its permanent membership.

Get this widget | Track details | eSnips Social DNA