Due Tuesday January the 13
Compare and/or Contrast the events of Watergate with the movie "Dick."
Must have an clear introduction, body, and conclusion.
Friday, January 9, 2009
Monday, December 15, 2008
Iraq rally for Bush shoe attacker
Thousands of Iraqis have demanded the release of a local TV reporter who threw his shoes at US President George W Bush at a Baghdad news conference.
Crowds gathered in Baghdad's Sadr City district, calling for "hero" Muntadar al-Zaidi to be freed from custody.
Officials at the Iraqi-owned TV station, al-Baghdadiya, called for the release of their journalist, saying he was exercising freedom of expression.
Iraqi officials have described the incident as shameful.
A statement released by the government said Mr Zaidi's actions, which also included him shouting insults at President Bush, "harmed the reputation of Iraqi journalists and Iraqi journalism in general".
Correspondents say the protesters are supporters of Shia cleric Moqtada Sadr - a leading critic of the US presence in Iraq. Smaller protests were reported in Basra and Najaf.
Cannot play media.You do not have the correct version of the flash player. Download the correct version
Advertisement
President Bush ducks as the shoes are thrown
The Iraqi government has demanded an on-air apology from his employer.
An Iraqi official was quoted by the Associated Press as saying that the journalist was being interrogated to determine whether anybody paid him to throw his shoes at President Bush.
He was also being tested for alcohol and drugs, and his shoes were being held as evidence, said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity.
The Cairo-based al-Baghdadiya TV channel said Mr Zaidi should be freed because he had been exercising freedom of expression - something which the Americans had promised to Iraqis on the ousting of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
"Any measures against Muntadar will be considered the acts of a dictatorial regime," the firm said in a statement.
The programming director for al-Baghdadiya, Muzhir al-Khafaji, described the journalist as a "proud Arab and an open-minded man".
He said he was afraid for Mr Zaidi's safety, adding that the reporter had been arrested by US officials twice before.
"We fear that our correspondents in Iraq will be arrested. We have 200 correspondents there," he added.
Do you feel this was an example of "free speech?" Why or why not?
Crowds gathered in Baghdad's Sadr City district, calling for "hero" Muntadar al-Zaidi to be freed from custody.
Officials at the Iraqi-owned TV station, al-Baghdadiya, called for the release of their journalist, saying he was exercising freedom of expression.
Iraqi officials have described the incident as shameful.
A statement released by the government said Mr Zaidi's actions, which also included him shouting insults at President Bush, "harmed the reputation of Iraqi journalists and Iraqi journalism in general".
Correspondents say the protesters are supporters of Shia cleric Moqtada Sadr - a leading critic of the US presence in Iraq. Smaller protests were reported in Basra and Najaf.
Cannot play media.You do not have the correct version of the flash player. Download the correct version
Advertisement
President Bush ducks as the shoes are thrown
The Iraqi government has demanded an on-air apology from his employer.
An Iraqi official was quoted by the Associated Press as saying that the journalist was being interrogated to determine whether anybody paid him to throw his shoes at President Bush.
He was also being tested for alcohol and drugs, and his shoes were being held as evidence, said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity.
The Cairo-based al-Baghdadiya TV channel said Mr Zaidi should be freed because he had been exercising freedom of expression - something which the Americans had promised to Iraqis on the ousting of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
"Any measures against Muntadar will be considered the acts of a dictatorial regime," the firm said in a statement.
The programming director for al-Baghdadiya, Muzhir al-Khafaji, described the journalist as a "proud Arab and an open-minded man".
He said he was afraid for Mr Zaidi's safety, adding that the reporter had been arrested by US officials twice before.
"We fear that our correspondents in Iraq will be arrested. We have 200 correspondents there," he added.
Do you feel this was an example of "free speech?" Why or why not?
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
US faces deep problems, OECD says
Obama's challenge
The OECD paints a grim picture of the challenges facing the incoming Obama administration, which takes office on 20 January.
It says that "the US economy is going through an exceptionally difficult period" and despite major policy interventions, it is likely that "activity will get worse before it gets better".
The OECD suggests that the weakness will continue well into 2010.
It also warns that "house prices appear to have further to fall, and foreclosures are widely expected to rise."
The real economy is predicted to decline through 2010
The decline in household wealth of about 20%, due to falls in the stock and housing markets, is likely to affect spending and household consumption.
The OECD broadly endorses the need for a further stimulus plan, saying that "macroeconomic policy should stand ready to provide a renewed stimulus".
But it warns that, "given the underlying fiscal situation, the package should aim to be strictly temporary, timely and targeted" - an approach that appears to differ from the plan for big infrastructure projects that President-elect Obama has talked about.
And it adds that in the longer term, "the ageing of the population and other trends put the Federal budget on an unsustainable course" and says that increased tax revenue and controls on spending will be needed.
Financial disruption
The OECD says that "resolving the financial crisis could be a long drawn-out process", which could require substantial government spending just as in previous banking crises.
It says that the "full effects of the forceful easing of monetary policy will only be felt after financial market conditions normalise".
So it argues that big rate cuts by the US central bank, the Fed, "appear to be roughly appropriate in light of the adverse effect on real activity" of the credit squeeze, and says that "monetary policy should remain highly accommodative for quite some time to support the economy and the financial system".
However, it warns that in the long run, the regulatory system needs to be fundamentally reformed, or else the rescue of troubled financial institutions "could inadvertently serve to encourage imprudent behaviour" in the future.
"A major overhaul of regulatory and supervisory policy is necessary to remedy the deficiencies in oversight that the crisis revealed," the report says.
It also calls for reform of the supervision of mortgage brokers, underwriters and credit agencies to protect borrowers and investors.
And it says, more controversially, that in the long-term "it would be preferable to leave the securitisation of mortgages to the private sector," eliminating or reducing the role of the big government-sponsored agencies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which were effectively nationalised by the government earlier this year.
What is one problem the United States faces in this article? What do you think Obama should do to help?
The OECD paints a grim picture of the challenges facing the incoming Obama administration, which takes office on 20 January.
It says that "the US economy is going through an exceptionally difficult period" and despite major policy interventions, it is likely that "activity will get worse before it gets better".
The OECD suggests that the weakness will continue well into 2010.
It also warns that "house prices appear to have further to fall, and foreclosures are widely expected to rise."
The real economy is predicted to decline through 2010
The decline in household wealth of about 20%, due to falls in the stock and housing markets, is likely to affect spending and household consumption.
The OECD broadly endorses the need for a further stimulus plan, saying that "macroeconomic policy should stand ready to provide a renewed stimulus".
But it warns that, "given the underlying fiscal situation, the package should aim to be strictly temporary, timely and targeted" - an approach that appears to differ from the plan for big infrastructure projects that President-elect Obama has talked about.
And it adds that in the longer term, "the ageing of the population and other trends put the Federal budget on an unsustainable course" and says that increased tax revenue and controls on spending will be needed.
Financial disruption
The OECD says that "resolving the financial crisis could be a long drawn-out process", which could require substantial government spending just as in previous banking crises.
It says that the "full effects of the forceful easing of monetary policy will only be felt after financial market conditions normalise".
So it argues that big rate cuts by the US central bank, the Fed, "appear to be roughly appropriate in light of the adverse effect on real activity" of the credit squeeze, and says that "monetary policy should remain highly accommodative for quite some time to support the economy and the financial system".
However, it warns that in the long run, the regulatory system needs to be fundamentally reformed, or else the rescue of troubled financial institutions "could inadvertently serve to encourage imprudent behaviour" in the future.
"A major overhaul of regulatory and supervisory policy is necessary to remedy the deficiencies in oversight that the crisis revealed," the report says.
It also calls for reform of the supervision of mortgage brokers, underwriters and credit agencies to protect borrowers and investors.
And it says, more controversially, that in the long-term "it would be preferable to leave the securitisation of mortgages to the private sector," eliminating or reducing the role of the big government-sponsored agencies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which were effectively nationalised by the government earlier this year.
What is one problem the United States faces in this article? What do you think Obama should do to help?
Monday, November 17, 2008
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has said he hopes US President-elect Barack Obama will help rebuild the strained relations between their two countries.
In a speech in Washington, Mr Medvedev said that a new US administration might be able to address what he described as a lack of "necessary mutual trust".
He said he wanted to meet Mr Obama soon after he takes office in January.
The Russian leader also indicated that Russia might accept a compromise over a planned US missile shield in Europe.
Two weeks ago, he said Moscow would neutralise the possible deployment by the US of a tracking radar in the Czech Republic and missile interceptors in Poland by stationing short-range missiles in its western enclave of Kaliningrad.
The US insists the shield is incapable of threatening Russia and is designed solely to guard against missile attacks by "rogue states".
'Encouraged by signals'
In his speech to the Council on Foreign Relations following the G20 summit on the global economic crisis in Washington, President Medvedev welcomed the election of Mr Obama on 4 November.
"US-Russian relations lack the necessary mutual trust. We pin such hopes on the arrival of the new US administration," he explained.
We have a chance to solve the problem through either agreeing on a global [anti-missile] system or, as a minimum, to find a solution on the existing programmes which would suit the Russian Federation
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev
Mr Medvedev said Russia had a strong "strategic partnership" with China, "a very good, full-fledged, friendly exchange".
"Of course I want to have the same kind of relations with the United States," he went on.
Relations between Moscow and Washington have been particularly strained since August by Russia's war with Georgia over the breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
Mr Medvedev said the first step to restoring relations would be a meeting soon after Mr Obama's inauguration, "without prevarications or preconditions".
The president also said that Russia would not be the first to escalate the situation over the plans for the US missile shield in Europe.
"We will not do anything until America takes the first step," he said.
Moscow says it will neutralise the US system with short-range missiles
Mr Medvedev said he had been encouraged by signs that Mr Obama was less enthusiastic about the shield than President George W Bush.
"[The] first signal we received shows that our partners plan to think about this programme rather than to simply rubber-stamp it," he said.
The Russian president also for the first time suggested Moscow might accept changes to the US shield plans, rather than simply their abandonment.
"We have a chance to solve the problem through either agreeing on a global system or, as a minimum, to find a solution on the existing programmes which would suit the Russian Federation," he added.
Knowing the past relationship between the United States and Russia do you believe Obama will help make it better?
In a speech in Washington, Mr Medvedev said that a new US administration might be able to address what he described as a lack of "necessary mutual trust".
He said he wanted to meet Mr Obama soon after he takes office in January.
The Russian leader also indicated that Russia might accept a compromise over a planned US missile shield in Europe.
Two weeks ago, he said Moscow would neutralise the possible deployment by the US of a tracking radar in the Czech Republic and missile interceptors in Poland by stationing short-range missiles in its western enclave of Kaliningrad.
The US insists the shield is incapable of threatening Russia and is designed solely to guard against missile attacks by "rogue states".
'Encouraged by signals'
In his speech to the Council on Foreign Relations following the G20 summit on the global economic crisis in Washington, President Medvedev welcomed the election of Mr Obama on 4 November.
"US-Russian relations lack the necessary mutual trust. We pin such hopes on the arrival of the new US administration," he explained.
We have a chance to solve the problem through either agreeing on a global [anti-missile] system or, as a minimum, to find a solution on the existing programmes which would suit the Russian Federation
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev
Mr Medvedev said Russia had a strong "strategic partnership" with China, "a very good, full-fledged, friendly exchange".
"Of course I want to have the same kind of relations with the United States," he went on.
Relations between Moscow and Washington have been particularly strained since August by Russia's war with Georgia over the breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
Mr Medvedev said the first step to restoring relations would be a meeting soon after Mr Obama's inauguration, "without prevarications or preconditions".
The president also said that Russia would not be the first to escalate the situation over the plans for the US missile shield in Europe.
"We will not do anything until America takes the first step," he said.
Moscow says it will neutralise the US system with short-range missiles
Mr Medvedev said he had been encouraged by signs that Mr Obama was less enthusiastic about the shield than President George W Bush.
"[The] first signal we received shows that our partners plan to think about this programme rather than to simply rubber-stamp it," he said.
The Russian president also for the first time suggested Moscow might accept changes to the US shield plans, rather than simply their abandonment.
"We have a chance to solve the problem through either agreeing on a global system or, as a minimum, to find a solution on the existing programmes which would suit the Russian Federation," he added.
Knowing the past relationship between the United States and Russia do you believe Obama will help make it better?
Friday, November 7, 2008
key foreign policy problems
What do you believe will be Obama's largest foreign problems? Pick two from below and tell me why you chose them.
President-elect Barack Obama, who takes office on 20 January 2009, will face a number of key foreign policy problems. Here are 10 current challenges - and how he might tackle them.
US ROLE IN THE WORLD
One conclusion from the US vote must be that the American electorate wants a significant change in foreign policy
US troops search house in Iraq
Iraq: Obama wants most US troops out by mid-2010
from that of George W Bush.
The change might be characterised as a move from unilateralism to multilateralism - and less talk about the United States as the "world's only superpower".
Confrontation might give way to greater diplomacy.
However, US presidents, whatever the expectations, often enter or get drawn into conflicts, so nobody should expect a conflict-free presidency. President-elect Obama will enter office fighting two existing wars. How he handles them will help define his era.
IRAQ
Barack Obama says he will tell his commanders to redefine their mission as one of "successfully ending the war." But that has to be done, he says, "responsibly".
He has defined this as giving time for the Iraqi government to strengthen its own armed forces and he wants a phased withdrawal of most US troops "within 16 months" of his inauguration, which means the end of May 2010.
Potentially, this could be huge policy success for him. However, a "residual" force would remain to conduct operations against al-Qaeda in Iraq, so no complete withdrawal is envisaged.
AFGHANISTAN
Perhaps the biggest challenge on his agenda. If in Iraq the war is winding down, in Afghanistan it is winding up.
President-elect Obama is promising to "focus on Afghanistan".
Soldier and Afghan elder
Improving the situation in Afghanistan may be the toughest challenge
He has said he will send two more combat brigades. He has also promised to attack al-Qaeda figures, especially Osama Bin Laden, wherever they might be and, it seems, whether or not Pakistan agrees.
Improving the situation in Afghanistan will mean improving the performance of the Afghan government and trying to evolve a more effective policy with Pakistan (whose stability is in itself a major problem) to undermine the Taleban and al-Qaeda forces entrenched in the Pakistan border regions.
'WAR ON TERROR'
President Bush's famous phrase might be given less prominence in an Obama administration. He wants to concentrate on winning what the 9/11 Commission called "the battle of ideas" by "returning to an American foreign policy consistent with America's traditional values and by partnering with moderates within the Islamic world to counter al-Qaeda propaganda".
However, there will still be a hard edge to his policy. He has said he "will not hesitate to use military force to take out terrorists who pose a direct threat to America."
Look for two key indicators - the closure of Guantanamo Bay and the extension of the ban on torture to the CIA, which means the end of waterboarding.
There is an 'arc of crisis' to be dealt with from Turkey to Pakistan - these days that includes Syria
The president-elect's in-tray
If, or rather when, Guantanamo Bay is closed, he will have to decide what to do with the hard core that the US authorities claim remains among the 255 or so prisoners still there.
President-elect Obama has suggested using the normal US legal system to try them, but some of the evidence available under the military commissions (evidence obtained by coercion or worse) would be banned from US courts. What then?
Look also for problems in new areas of al-Qaeda activity, especially Algeria and Somalia.
IRAN
Potentially a huge crisis. Much depends on what Iran does.
If it continues with its low-grade enrichment of uranium, it could be that a new administration will simply carry on with sanctions, even trying to widen and deepen them.
An Iranian move to enrich to weapons-grade uranium would signal a step increase, in which case Israel would be urging military strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities.
The consequences of such a strike would be severe.
Barack Obama has said he will talk to Iran "without conditions", though not necessarily at presidential level in the first instance. The current Iranian leadership is unlikely to give up enrichment, so any agreement might have to include an Iranian right to some enrichment, but under strict controls.
MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS
President Bush had hoped to have an agreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians by the end of this year but that looks impossible.
So Barack Obama will probably be faced with the perennial issue of how far to intervene in the peace process, such as it is, with the weight of the United States.
The first stage is the Israeli election set for 10 February, which should indicate whether there will be an Israeli government ready to make compromises.
Beyond Israel/Palestine, there is what Richard Holbrooke, a possible Secretary of State, has called an "arc of crisis" to be dealt with from Turkey to Pakistan. These days that includes Syria, whose help will be needed for the stabilisation of Iraq next door.
RUSSIA
Recent events in Georgia precipitated a crisis in relations between Russia and the West not seen since the end of the Cold War.
This encapsulated all the frustrations that have built up on both sides and raised the question of how the new administration will frame its policy towards Russia. It needs Russian help in dealing with other problems such as Iran and Darfur, where the Security Council is driving policy.
Russian soldiers on a tank
Russia's military intervention in Georgia raised the diplomatic stakes
The immediate issue is how fast to allow Georgia (and Ukraine) to advance towards the Nato membership they have been promised in principle.
Nato foreign ministers discuss this in December, and behind the scenes the Obama team will have its say. But even the Bush administration is now saying that Georgian membership is "years away", so there are opportunities here for progress with Russia.
The US anti-missile system to be installed in Poland and the Czech Republic remains a problem for Russia. Will that be slowed down?
Clues for how President-elect Obama will deal with Russia will also be seen in how he handles nuclear issues. A key one is whether the US and Russia will negotiate further reductions in nuclear weapons.
On the wider front, Barack Obama endorsed the call last year by four senior former US diplomats (including Henry Kissinger) for the US to aim for a nuclear weapons-free world, as it is supposed to be under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. How far will this be taken?
NORTH KOREA
The latest North Korean moves have been positive. The country has agreed on procedures to verify the halt in its nuclear programme in exchange for being removed from the American list of terrorist-supporting states.
But the North is likely to retain the nuclear weapons it says it has, so the issue for the next president is whether he can get North Korea to give up its weapons altogether. And who will the president be dealing with - is Kim Jong-il a well man?
CHINA
US relations with China are important across the board, since China is a permanent member of the Security Council and wields immense economic influence in the world.
China itself is not currently a problem for the US, though the future of Taiwan always has the potential to divide them and Tibet continues to be an irritant.
Over recent years, China has chosen to concentrate on domestic economic development and as long as that continues to be its priority, its relations with the US are likely to remain stable. There is no indication that Barack Obama wants anything else.
'NEW DIPLOMACY': FINANCE, CLIMATE CHANGE, ENERGY
Under this heading come the major issues that are part of what is sometimes called the new diplomacy.
The current financial crisis, in which US government money has been used to shore up the banks, will force the next president to take a more hands-on approach than presidents usually like to. And he will ask himself how to counter the diminished standing that the US, through the failure of its financial organisations, now has in the world.
Obama's handling of these new agenda problems will help determine how the US will forge a new role for itself in the world
Barack Obama has committed himself to doing more on global warming and wants greenhouse gases reduced by 80% by 2050. This will be one of the most important issues of his presidency, as the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012 and negotiations about a follow-up have stalled.
Energy, especially the supply of oil, will be another challenge. The president-elect has pledged to eliminate US reliance on Middle East and Venezuelan oil within 10 years.
However, practically every president, going back to Jimmy Carter in 1979, says that America must use less oil and finds it hard to take action.
President-elect Obama's handling of these new agenda problems will help determine the answer to the first of these top 10 problems - how the US will forge a new role for itself in the world under his administratio
President-elect Barack Obama, who takes office on 20 January 2009, will face a number of key foreign policy problems. Here are 10 current challenges - and how he might tackle them.
US ROLE IN THE WORLD
One conclusion from the US vote must be that the American electorate wants a significant change in foreign policy
US troops search house in Iraq
Iraq: Obama wants most US troops out by mid-2010
from that of George W Bush.
The change might be characterised as a move from unilateralism to multilateralism - and less talk about the United States as the "world's only superpower".
Confrontation might give way to greater diplomacy.
However, US presidents, whatever the expectations, often enter or get drawn into conflicts, so nobody should expect a conflict-free presidency. President-elect Obama will enter office fighting two existing wars. How he handles them will help define his era.
IRAQ
Barack Obama says he will tell his commanders to redefine their mission as one of "successfully ending the war." But that has to be done, he says, "responsibly".
He has defined this as giving time for the Iraqi government to strengthen its own armed forces and he wants a phased withdrawal of most US troops "within 16 months" of his inauguration, which means the end of May 2010.
Potentially, this could be huge policy success for him. However, a "residual" force would remain to conduct operations against al-Qaeda in Iraq, so no complete withdrawal is envisaged.
AFGHANISTAN
Perhaps the biggest challenge on his agenda. If in Iraq the war is winding down, in Afghanistan it is winding up.
President-elect Obama is promising to "focus on Afghanistan".
Soldier and Afghan elder
Improving the situation in Afghanistan may be the toughest challenge
He has said he will send two more combat brigades. He has also promised to attack al-Qaeda figures, especially Osama Bin Laden, wherever they might be and, it seems, whether or not Pakistan agrees.
Improving the situation in Afghanistan will mean improving the performance of the Afghan government and trying to evolve a more effective policy with Pakistan (whose stability is in itself a major problem) to undermine the Taleban and al-Qaeda forces entrenched in the Pakistan border regions.
'WAR ON TERROR'
President Bush's famous phrase might be given less prominence in an Obama administration. He wants to concentrate on winning what the 9/11 Commission called "the battle of ideas" by "returning to an American foreign policy consistent with America's traditional values and by partnering with moderates within the Islamic world to counter al-Qaeda propaganda".
However, there will still be a hard edge to his policy. He has said he "will not hesitate to use military force to take out terrorists who pose a direct threat to America."
Look for two key indicators - the closure of Guantanamo Bay and the extension of the ban on torture to the CIA, which means the end of waterboarding.
There is an 'arc of crisis' to be dealt with from Turkey to Pakistan - these days that includes Syria
The president-elect's in-tray
If, or rather when, Guantanamo Bay is closed, he will have to decide what to do with the hard core that the US authorities claim remains among the 255 or so prisoners still there.
President-elect Obama has suggested using the normal US legal system to try them, but some of the evidence available under the military commissions (evidence obtained by coercion or worse) would be banned from US courts. What then?
Look also for problems in new areas of al-Qaeda activity, especially Algeria and Somalia.
IRAN
Potentially a huge crisis. Much depends on what Iran does.
If it continues with its low-grade enrichment of uranium, it could be that a new administration will simply carry on with sanctions, even trying to widen and deepen them.
An Iranian move to enrich to weapons-grade uranium would signal a step increase, in which case Israel would be urging military strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities.
The consequences of such a strike would be severe.
Barack Obama has said he will talk to Iran "without conditions", though not necessarily at presidential level in the first instance. The current Iranian leadership is unlikely to give up enrichment, so any agreement might have to include an Iranian right to some enrichment, but under strict controls.
MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS
President Bush had hoped to have an agreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians by the end of this year but that looks impossible.
So Barack Obama will probably be faced with the perennial issue of how far to intervene in the peace process, such as it is, with the weight of the United States.
The first stage is the Israeli election set for 10 February, which should indicate whether there will be an Israeli government ready to make compromises.
Beyond Israel/Palestine, there is what Richard Holbrooke, a possible Secretary of State, has called an "arc of crisis" to be dealt with from Turkey to Pakistan. These days that includes Syria, whose help will be needed for the stabilisation of Iraq next door.
RUSSIA
Recent events in Georgia precipitated a crisis in relations between Russia and the West not seen since the end of the Cold War.
This encapsulated all the frustrations that have built up on both sides and raised the question of how the new administration will frame its policy towards Russia. It needs Russian help in dealing with other problems such as Iran and Darfur, where the Security Council is driving policy.
Russian soldiers on a tank
Russia's military intervention in Georgia raised the diplomatic stakes
The immediate issue is how fast to allow Georgia (and Ukraine) to advance towards the Nato membership they have been promised in principle.
Nato foreign ministers discuss this in December, and behind the scenes the Obama team will have its say. But even the Bush administration is now saying that Georgian membership is "years away", so there are opportunities here for progress with Russia.
The US anti-missile system to be installed in Poland and the Czech Republic remains a problem for Russia. Will that be slowed down?
Clues for how President-elect Obama will deal with Russia will also be seen in how he handles nuclear issues. A key one is whether the US and Russia will negotiate further reductions in nuclear weapons.
On the wider front, Barack Obama endorsed the call last year by four senior former US diplomats (including Henry Kissinger) for the US to aim for a nuclear weapons-free world, as it is supposed to be under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. How far will this be taken?
NORTH KOREA
The latest North Korean moves have been positive. The country has agreed on procedures to verify the halt in its nuclear programme in exchange for being removed from the American list of terrorist-supporting states.
But the North is likely to retain the nuclear weapons it says it has, so the issue for the next president is whether he can get North Korea to give up its weapons altogether. And who will the president be dealing with - is Kim Jong-il a well man?
CHINA
US relations with China are important across the board, since China is a permanent member of the Security Council and wields immense economic influence in the world.
China itself is not currently a problem for the US, though the future of Taiwan always has the potential to divide them and Tibet continues to be an irritant.
Over recent years, China has chosen to concentrate on domestic economic development and as long as that continues to be its priority, its relations with the US are likely to remain stable. There is no indication that Barack Obama wants anything else.
'NEW DIPLOMACY': FINANCE, CLIMATE CHANGE, ENERGY
Under this heading come the major issues that are part of what is sometimes called the new diplomacy.
The current financial crisis, in which US government money has been used to shore up the banks, will force the next president to take a more hands-on approach than presidents usually like to. And he will ask himself how to counter the diminished standing that the US, through the failure of its financial organisations, now has in the world.
Obama's handling of these new agenda problems will help determine how the US will forge a new role for itself in the world
Barack Obama has committed himself to doing more on global warming and wants greenhouse gases reduced by 80% by 2050. This will be one of the most important issues of his presidency, as the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012 and negotiations about a follow-up have stalled.
Energy, especially the supply of oil, will be another challenge. The president-elect has pledged to eliminate US reliance on Middle East and Venezuelan oil within 10 years.
However, practically every president, going back to Jimmy Carter in 1979, says that America must use less oil and finds it hard to take action.
President-elect Obama's handling of these new agenda problems will help determine the answer to the first of these top 10 problems - how the US will forge a new role for itself in the world under his administratio
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Recession fears grip US consumers
Recession fears grip US consumers
US consumers are increasingly reluctant to spend money
Consumer spending in the US fell in September by the biggest amount in four years, the Commerce Department said.
Personal spending fell by 0.3% last month, despite a rise in incomes of 0.2%, official figures showed.
The drop in expenditure was the biggest since June 2004, and steeper than economists had predicted.
On Thursday, the Commerce Department issued figures showing the US economy shrank at an annualised rate of 0.3% between July and September.
Consumer spending accounts for two-thirds of total US economic activity.
A number of US retailers have reported falls in sales for September, including department store JC Penny, upmarket rival Saks, high street retailer American Eagle Outfitters and online retailer Target Corp.
Low cost retailers Wal-Mart and Costco also failed to meet Wall Street expectations of sales for the month.
A drop in spending had been expected, although not as steep as 0.3%.
Benign inflation
The spending report also showed that consumer inflation edged up 0.1% in September, or 0.2% excluding energy and food costs.
In a separate report, also released on Friday, the US Labour Department said wages and benefits of US workers rose 0.7% in the third quarter, the same increase recorded in the previous two quarters.
Concerns over inflation have abated somewhat prompting the Federal Reserve to seek ways to boost the economy, such as by lowering interest rates to increase borrowing.
On Wednesday, the US Federal Reserve cut its key interest rate from 1.5% to 1%, as widely expected. The relative lack of inflationary pressure in the US economy means the Fed will be able to make further cuts should it wish.
Shaky confidence
Earlier in the week, Conference Board figures showed US consumer confidence at a record low in October, amid falling global stock markets, rising property foreclosures and increasing job losses.
The board said the monthly consumer confidence index fell to 38, down from a revised 61.4 in September and below analysts' expectations of 52.
It was the lowest since the board began tracking consumer sentiment in 1967.
What effect do you believe low consumer sentiment will have on this holiday season and the economy?
US consumers are increasingly reluctant to spend money
Consumer spending in the US fell in September by the biggest amount in four years, the Commerce Department said.
Personal spending fell by 0.3% last month, despite a rise in incomes of 0.2%, official figures showed.
The drop in expenditure was the biggest since June 2004, and steeper than economists had predicted.
On Thursday, the Commerce Department issued figures showing the US economy shrank at an annualised rate of 0.3% between July and September.
Consumer spending accounts for two-thirds of total US economic activity.
A number of US retailers have reported falls in sales for September, including department store JC Penny, upmarket rival Saks, high street retailer American Eagle Outfitters and online retailer Target Corp.
Low cost retailers Wal-Mart and Costco also failed to meet Wall Street expectations of sales for the month.
A drop in spending had been expected, although not as steep as 0.3%.
Benign inflation
The spending report also showed that consumer inflation edged up 0.1% in September, or 0.2% excluding energy and food costs.
In a separate report, also released on Friday, the US Labour Department said wages and benefits of US workers rose 0.7% in the third quarter, the same increase recorded in the previous two quarters.
Concerns over inflation have abated somewhat prompting the Federal Reserve to seek ways to boost the economy, such as by lowering interest rates to increase borrowing.
On Wednesday, the US Federal Reserve cut its key interest rate from 1.5% to 1%, as widely expected. The relative lack of inflationary pressure in the US economy means the Fed will be able to make further cuts should it wish.
Shaky confidence
Earlier in the week, Conference Board figures showed US consumer confidence at a record low in October, amid falling global stock markets, rising property foreclosures and increasing job losses.
The board said the monthly consumer confidence index fell to 38, down from a revised 61.4 in September and below analysts' expectations of 52.
It was the lowest since the board began tracking consumer sentiment in 1967.
What effect do you believe low consumer sentiment will have on this holiday season and the economy?
Sunday, October 26, 2008
McCain attacks Obama's tax plans
Republican presidential candidate John McCain has again attacked his rival's policy of re-distributing wealth, saying the middle class would suffer.
Mr McCain told supporters in the western state of New Mexico that his plan was to create jobs for Americans.
But Democratic rival Barack Obama said tax cuts would be put "into the pockets of 95% of working families".
He said Mr McCain sought to distance himself from failed Bush administration policies he had backed for years.
With just a week of full campaigning left, polls put Mr Obama ahead overall.
A poll for Newsweek put Mr Obama at 53% support and McCain at 40%.
NBC News reported that Mr Obama was now leading in enough states to put him over the 270 electoral college votes needed to win the presidency.
We've seen that movie before in other countries. That's not America
John McCain
Mr McCain began his weekend campaigning in New Mexico, a state won by the Republicans in 2004 but which could be key in the 4 November presidential vote.
He admitted he was a few points down, but told the rally "don't give up hope".
"Stand up and fight. America's worth fighting for."
Attempting to distance himself from President George W Bush, Mr McCain said: "We cannot spend the next four years as we have much of the last eight, hoping for our luck to change at home and abroad."
Mr Obama has proposed a tax increase on the 5% of taxpayers who make more than $250,000 a year and advocates tax cuts for those who make less.
"He [Obama] believes in redistributing wealth. That means taking money from one group of Americans and giving it to another. We've seen that movie before in other countries. That's not America," the Republican senator said.
He said 50% of small businesses - and their 16 million employees - would feel the impact of Democrat tax rises, to pay for nearly $1 trillion of new government spending proposed by Mr Obama.
Do you believe Obama has a sound tax plan? Why or why not?
Mr McCain told supporters in the western state of New Mexico that his plan was to create jobs for Americans.
But Democratic rival Barack Obama said tax cuts would be put "into the pockets of 95% of working families".
He said Mr McCain sought to distance himself from failed Bush administration policies he had backed for years.
With just a week of full campaigning left, polls put Mr Obama ahead overall.
A poll for Newsweek put Mr Obama at 53% support and McCain at 40%.
NBC News reported that Mr Obama was now leading in enough states to put him over the 270 electoral college votes needed to win the presidency.
We've seen that movie before in other countries. That's not America
John McCain
Mr McCain began his weekend campaigning in New Mexico, a state won by the Republicans in 2004 but which could be key in the 4 November presidential vote.
He admitted he was a few points down, but told the rally "don't give up hope".
"Stand up and fight. America's worth fighting for."
Attempting to distance himself from President George W Bush, Mr McCain said: "We cannot spend the next four years as we have much of the last eight, hoping for our luck to change at home and abroad."
Mr Obama has proposed a tax increase on the 5% of taxpayers who make more than $250,000 a year and advocates tax cuts for those who make less.
"He [Obama] believes in redistributing wealth. That means taking money from one group of Americans and giving it to another. We've seen that movie before in other countries. That's not America," the Republican senator said.
He said 50% of small businesses - and their 16 million employees - would feel the impact of Democrat tax rises, to pay for nearly $1 trillion of new government spending proposed by Mr Obama.
Do you believe Obama has a sound tax plan? Why or why not?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)