Presidential candidate Barack Obama had promised “Change we can believe in”. Liberals, and not just Americans, built high hopes. They believed that, yes, America could have a different kind of leadership, for its own sake and for that of the rest of the world.
As it is turning out, Obama’s Presidency is largely more of the same.
Perhaps, the establishment in Washington is proving to be a harder nut to crack than he anticipated. The state of the economy, which the first African-American President inherited, and Republican control of the House of Representatives have been frustrating his reform drive.
Undoubtedly, he has been more successful in building aspirations and expectations than in fulfilling them, as evidenced by the 2009 Nobel Prize for Peace that he was awarded. Obama’s Presidency is an enigma and does not augur well for the continued evolution of mature democracies. The main achievements of the 44th US President have been the reform in medical care and the elimination of Osama bin Laden. Many of his other electoral promises remain unfulfilled.
Guantanamo Bay still has 66 detainees, and, yet, Obama speaks about the need to end the “war on terrorism”. Obama talks about wisdom and morality and that the USA should not abuse its technological might. Still, drone attacks continue in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, taking the lives of innocent people.
Obama’s biggest quandary is balancing security considerations with respect for freedom of information and individual privacy. On May 7, 2012 Associated Press carried a story about a CIA operation in Yemen that thwarted an al-Qaeda bomb plot.
To try to locate the source of leaked classified information, the Justice Department secretly seized the phone records of some 20 journalists. Subsequently, addressing the National Defence University, Obama stated: “I am troubled by the possibility that leak investigations may chill the investigative journalism that holds government accountable... Journalists should not be at legal risk for doing their jobs” (The New York Times, May 23).
Makes you wonder who is really running the show.
The most recent debacle relates to Edward Snowden’s revelations on the espionage activities of the National Secrecy Agency. Snowden is now an international fugitive as his passport has been withdrawn and the US continues to pressure other countries not to offer him asylum.
More than half of Americans think Snowden is a whistleblower and not a traitor. The EU Greens intend to recommend Snowden for the Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought but the former CIA employee is still stranded in the transit area of Moscow’s airport.
Snowden’s mortal sin has been to unveil the NSA’s extensive surveillance data programme code named Prism. This in cooperation with Britain’s secret services, the GCHQ, which run a similar programme called Tempora. Between them they monitor global telecommunications and internet traffic, involving the world’s top nine data transmission corporations.
Snowden insists that his revelations were meant to show that the Obama Administration was misleading the American people.
US intelligence chief, James Clapper, last March told the Senate intelligence committee that there was no such massive surveillance programme. The US government knows that it has transgressed what is permitted by the Patriot Act (2001), redefining the word ‘relevant’ to mean ‘everything’ (Wall Street Journal).
Obama has been trying to defend his Administration by claiming that such espionage is common practice.
This, of course, is partly true. However, the US spying on EU summit and council meetings, making use of Nato’s offices in Brussels are not exactly good examples of ‘camaraderie’. Much of this ‘intelligence gathering’ is of a business nature and confuses the public, especially so soon after both sides merrily announced their embarking on a bilateral free trade zone.
Germany was a primary target of the NSA. This caused public outrage in a country with a turbulent history in individual privacy at the hands of the Nazi and Communist regimes. Obama has promised Angela Merkel that he will explain things.
They will surely find a way to cover up the whole affair, as it is in their mutual best interest. Obama’s overriding concern is with political fallout back home.
Technological developments have made it easy for any State to eavesdrop on its citizens
Who will safeguard the privacy rights of citizens, given that most governments seem to have other priorities? Technological developments have made it easy for any State to eavesdrop on its citizens.
Many citizens are unaware about the possibilities that the internet and mobile telephony offer for their ideas and actions to be monitored by their own government as well as governments of powerful countries.
Why are many governments not sensitising and educating their citizens about these risks? Who will champion the creation of an international treaty that clearly regulates data protection and personal privacy?
It is becoming increasingly obvious that the inbuilt checks and balances meant to ensure the smooth functioning of modern democracies are no longer effective. The power of money has grown too strong and its pervasiveness is threatening the very foundations of democracy. It is simplistic and sheer propaganda to continue associating Big Brother activities with totalitarian regimes.
The US is meant to be a beacon of democracy. The Obama that the world hoped for would not declare war on a lonely whistleblower but would fight to control the excesses of his Administration and the powerful lobby groups that feed on it in Washington. Obama owes this to all those that had so much faith in him.
fms18@onvol.net