Periscope - Kerry for President

By NiallO’Dowd

IT is the mother of all battles, the 2004 presidential race that will keep every Americans on edge right through November 2 — and perhaps beyond.

It has become a cliché to say that September 11 changed the world, but nowhere is it more evident than in the intense worldwide interest in this year’s U.S. presidential election.

No matter where in the world you are on November 3, there seems little doubt that you will wake up to the lead story in the local media about the winner and loser (or perhaps the tie) in this year’s race.

There have been record numbers watching the debates, and an unprecedented number of voters are expected to turn out to make their choice count. The world is very aware of the huge stakes.

Contrast that with four years ago, pre-September 11, when the Al Gore/George Bush face off was being called the “Seinfeld election” because it was about nothing, or seemed to be.

It was in retrospect the most important election of our time. After September 11 hit, the immediate reaction of a President Gore would likely have been the same — an invasion of Afghanistan — but it is highly dubious that he would have commenced the Iraq adventure which currently is mired down in such vicious trench warfare.

So who is best to lead us this time around? The man who weathered the September 11 tragedy with such brilliance, and then proceeded to careen off to Iraq on very dubious grounds, or the man who would, doubtless, be a lot more cautious about foreign wars, and who would consult on a far larger scale than the current incumbent?

It is important to factor in here the phenomenon of anti-Bush sentiment which has appeared very widely overseas. Many commentators here call it anti-Americanism, but it is no more anti-American than the 50% or so of American voters who likewise express a strong dislike of the current incumbent. To be anti-Bush is not to be anti-American.

The Irish people, for instance, did not become anti-American overnight. Bill Clinton brought close to a million people on the Irish streets in welcome when he visited the island during the peace process days. 

It is important to distinguish between the anti-Bush sentiment based on what Irish people see as his pre-emptive policies — his dismissal of the United Nations, his rush to war — and the genuine regard and affection that America is held in in Ireland. Such policies have damaged the U.S. almost everywhere overseas. 

In the immediate aftermath of September 11 there was a tidal wave of sentiment and sympathy encapsulated in Le Monde, the French paper, whose headline screamed “We Are All Americans Now.” If another September 11 happened now, the prevailing opinion abroad might well be, “Well, What Did You Expect?”

The gulf between most of the rest of the world and the U.S. is worrying. The anti-Bush sentiment seen abroad has the ability to harden into a long-term contempt for this country and all that it stands for which could have untold consequences.

America needs the world. That message may not be evident yet in Washington, but the morass in Iraq is just the latest example where suddenly the United Nations is needed to run elections, and the need for troops from other countries to train Iraqis and carry out peacekeeping tasks has never been greater.

This country functions best when it is first among equals, not when it decides it can play by its own rules. America as imperialist does not fit with the incredible democratic principles on which this country was founded. 

It seems to us that Senator Kerry is more likely to bring back that sense of cooperation and international unity in a dangerous world. We support him for president.