:: Govind Talwalkar

Presidential debate ended in a draw

Govind Talwalkar

Neither Senator John McCain nor Senator Barack Obama won a decisive victory in the first presidential debate held on Friday at the University of Mississippi, Oxford. Each nominee was at home in his forte, i.e. Mr McCain on national security and foreign relations, and Mr Obama on economic issues. Nevertheless, not all the solutions offered by both are totally acceptable.

There was some doubt about whether the debate would be held at all, as Mr McCain plunged himself in efforts to find a solution to the worst-ever financial crisis after the Great Depression, which held him up in Washington. But, he made it to the debate.

That Mr Obama did not make a mistake in the debate is taken as his victory by the adoring media. The bar for him is always very low. But after listening to the debate, it became apparent that unlike Mr Obama, Hillary Clinton would not have been weak while discussing foreign relations. Instead, she would have been more effective, comfortable going into details and being specific about the economic problems. The debate was on foreign relations and national security, but since it had the backdrop of the great financial crisis, it was obvious that economic problems would dominate.

Mr Obama hammered the point that the Bush administration’s failed policies, mostly supported by Mr McCain, have brought the country to the present sorry pass (though it must be admitted that he was mistaken in holding the Mr Bush’s tax cuts solely responsible). Mr Obama also blamed the administration’s policies which gave a free hand to American companies to invest in foreign countries and cutting jobs in America.

Mr Obama had to be reminded that the upper limit of tax on the companies in America is 34 per cent, while in Ireland it is 11 per cent. Moreover, the American auto industry has lost the market in the country, while Japanese auto companies are making profits and expanding the business here.

Mr McCain, however, was on slippery ground. He never spoke about the sufferings of the common man who fears about an uncertain future, rising cost of education and prescription drugs. Economics is not either candidate’s expertise, hence they indulge in generalities. Moreover, it is not the Republicans alone responsible for the crisis. Democrats also share the blame.

It is true that Mr Obama had voiced his opposition to invade Iraq. But now the issue is not what happened in the past but how to get out honourably. On this, Mr McCain is more realistic. He gives the impression that he is obsessed by national security issue and gives low priority to other issues. This was evident in the debate. On the other hand, Mr Obama’s only capital on the national security issue seems to be his initial objection to the Iraq war.

Mr Obama had made some naive statements in the primaries, and Mr McCain cashed on them in this debate. For instance, Mr Obama had declared that as President he would have no hesitation in negotiating with the present heads of Iran, Cuba, North Korea and Venezuela without any preparations. In Friday’s debate, he tried to wriggle out by citing Dr Henry Kissinger’s statement. But Dr Kissinger has never said that such talks should be held without any prior preparations. Immediately after the debate, Dr Kissinger clarified his position, which contradicts what Mr Obama attributed to him.

Mr McCain and Mr Obama agreed that Russia is showing muscle power and trying to dominate its neighbours. But both conveniently forgot that Russians were provoked by the US’ encircling policies. Mr Obama said that preparations should be made to admit Georgia and Ukraine to Nato. It appears that he thought it was up to the US alone to decide on such an admission.

Georgia and Ukraine are not members of Nato, not because the Bush administration failed to exert its power, but because of the stiff opposition by European allies. They reluctantly admitted Baltic States into the alliance and want to expand it to include countries which border Russia. The US has also angered Russia by placing missiles in Poland and Czechoslovakia.

Mr McCain also criticised Mr Obama’s threat to unilateral use of military against Al Qaeda terrorists in Pakistan. Mr Obama, at the same time, had suggested that financial aid to Pakistan should be tripled. If he wants to take military action against Pakistan, then why does he want to reward them with aid at the same time?

Some commentators, who favour Mr Obama, have described Mr McCain as the man of the 20th century and Mr Obama as that of 21st. But both seem to share the same view about the world. That is why they talk of restoring the moral and military superiority of the US in the world. But in the last 25 years Western Europe, Russia, China, Japan and India have emerged as strong entities. Therefore, this language of moral and military superiority by any nation is futile.

With the present financial crisis, Europeans and Asians are skeptical about whether they should follow the American economic model. A recent survey in the Wall Street Journal emphasises the fact that the US is no longer a model to be followed by several nations. The German Chancellor was enamoured by American economic policies but now thinks that Europe will have to chalk out its own path.

The former Malaysian Prime Minister has said that our teachers (the US) have a problem of their own. His fingers were burned in the 90s when he accepted the advice of Robert Rubin and others in the Clinton administration and deregulated on a very large scale. The Malaysian economy was ruined as a result and took some time to recover. (The very same Mr Rubin is now one of the Mr Obama’s economic advisors.) Now US itself wants to resort to some regulations.

This is why US will have to look inward and mend various institutions which have broken down. It should ask itself why, after every 10 years or so, one or the other sector collapses. In the last decade of the 20th century, Enron collapsed and the tech bubble burst. Now a terrible economic crisis has erupted because of the unbridled mortgages. So doctor, heal thyself.