E-H-(support site)
Sito di supporto al blog "Euro-Holocaust"
Chi sono
Disclaimer
Questo blog non rappresenta una testata giornalistica in quanto viene aggiornato senza alcuna periodicità . Non può pertanto considerarsi un prodotto editoriale ai sensi della legge n. 62 del 7.03.2001
Parte delle immagini usate in questo blog viene dalla Rete e i diritti d'autore appartengono ai rispettivi proprietari.
Bottoni
Dopo la candidatura di Barack Obama - Parte 2
- Dall'articolo "Con queste primarie l’America si è scoperta sessista" (Alessandra Farkas, Corriere della Sera, 4 giugno 2008):
«Oggi sono infelice, ben più di quanto mi sarei mai aspettata, perché non vedrò mai una donna alla Casa Bianca. La resa di Hillary è una sconfitta e un giorno di lutto per tutte noi».
Dall'altro lato del filo la scrittrice e guru femminista Erica Jong non fa nulla per celare l'amarezza. «Se una candidata formidabile e competente quanto Hillary può essere abbattuta da un uomo di ben inferiore esperienza ma più giovane, nessun'altra può farcela», profetizza l'autrice di Paura di volare. Hillary è vittima del sessismo e del giovanilismo».
In che senso?
«Il messaggio dei mass-media durante la corsa è stato brutalmente semplice: "Il tuo tempo è esaurito, spostati e fai largo ai giovani". E' una duplice sconfitta per le donne della mia generazione perché mostra l'agghiacciante doppio standard secondo cui solo per noi l'esperienza non conta nulla. Le donne oggi si sentono derubate e livide di collera».
Dove andrà a finire tutto il loro rancore?
«Difficile dirlo, anche se penso che, alla fine, capiranno che solo il partito democratico rappresenta i loro interessi e quindi voteranno Obama. Che però non deve dar nulla per scontato».
Cosa intende dire?
«Obama dovrà lavorare sodo per dimostrarci di avere veramente a cuore la sorte di donne e bambini: due temi cui Hillary ha dedicato la sua intera vita. Ma gli conviene perché ha bisogno dei milioni di elettori che gli hanno preferito la senatrice di New York».
Quanto contano gli errori di Bill Clinton nella disfatta?
«Soltanto la figlia Chelsea ha aiutato Hillary mentre il marito l'ha affondata. Ma il suo vero, grande problema è l'essere una donna: un anatema nell'America di oggi. Il livello di misoginia e veleno antifemminista emerso in questa campagna ha lasciato molti di stucco. Io ho vissuto quest'odio irrazionale contro le donne sulla mia pelle per tutta la mia carriera ».
Che impatto lascerà sul tessuto umano e culturale del Paese?
«Commenti come quello di Jack Cafferty, che alla Cnn ha paragonato Hillary a una madre arcigna che sa solo disprezzare e rimproverare i figli, o di William Kristol, che sulla Fox se l'è presa con tutte le donne bianche, sono bombe a orologeria. L'America comincia solo ora ad affrontare l'impatto devastante di questa campagna di fango misogino e sessista».
Il partito ritroverà l'unità perduta?
«Sì, se Obama chiamerà Hillary come vicepresidente, mostrando al mondo di essere un femminista. Anch'io voterò la cosiddetta faccia nuova e del cambiamento. Speriamo sia tale, visto che lo si conosce tanto poco ».
Tutto è bene ciò che finisce bene, insomma?
«Non direi. L'unica cosa positiva della sconfitta di Hillary è che ci ha costretti a guardare al femminismo in maniera completamente nuova. Avevamo dato per scontato i suoi traguardi e ci ritroviamo ad interrogarci perché mai l'eguaglianza delle donne in America non sia mai stata realizzata».
Dopo la candidatura di Barack Obama
- Dall'articolo "L'Afrique salue le succès de Barack Obama" (Le Nouvel Observateur, 5 giugno 2008):
L'Afrique s'est félicitée jeudi 5 juin de la victoire à l'investiture démocrate présidentielle américaine d'un "fils" du continent, Barack Obama, dont le père était kényan. La presse y voit "la fin effective des préjugés raciaux aux Etats-Unis".
"Notre fils à la tête de la super-puissance" américaine, s'exclame le quotidien de Nairobi Daily Metro, avec une photo pleine page du sénateur, souriant, le bras levé en signe de victoire.
"Moment historique", titre de son côté le Nation, selon qui il y a "beaucoup de raisons" pour expliquer "l'hystérie" pro-Obama au Kenya, la première étant "la fierté raciale et ethnique qu'un homme noir puisse devenir le roi de l'empire", tout en ayant gardé des attaches en Afrique.
La grand-mère du candidat démocrate, Sarah Obama, une paysanne âgée de 86 ans, vit toujours dans son village de l'ouest du Kenya, Nyang'oma, sur les rives du lac Victoria, au coeur du continent.
La victoire de Barack Obama - premier métis de l'histoire américaine à avoir une chance de gagner la présidentielle - est "un moment décisif", relève le quotidien sud-africain The Star, selon qui ce succès "reflète la croissance phénoménale de la tolérance en Amérique".
"historique"
Mettant en avant le caractère "historique" de ce succès, la presse camerounaise, comme le Cameroon Tribune, estime que le sénateur démocrate devient le symbole de "la nouvelle société américaine, où les conditions raciales deviennent une préoccupation secondaire pour certains".
Cette analyse de l'évolution de la société américaine est d'ailleurs largement partagée en Afrique, où certains parlent même de "révolution", comme le président sénégalais Aboulaye Wade.
"Je pense que le fait qu'aujourd'hui des Blancs puissent choisir un Noir comme candidat, c'est une révolution dans les mentalités aux Etats-Unis", Aboulaye Wade.
L'investiture de Barack Obama montre "la capacité (de la société américaine) à avancer et à transcender ses contradictions, même si les vieux démons ne sont pas totalement anéantis", commente le quotidien algérien AlgérieNews [nei giorni scorsi, in Algeria, nuovamente si è ripetuto il caso di persone arrestate per aver partecipato a messe cristiane non autorizzate. E parlano di "vecchi demoni"!, ndr].
La fin des préjugés raciaux
"Si l'Amérique profonde semble prête à être gouvernée par un président de couleur, il n'en demeure pas moins que des lobbies ultra-conservateurs, allergiques à une telle éventualité, peuvent tenter de réconcilier l'Amérique avec les vieux démons", met toutefois en garde le journal.
N'empêche, le choix des démocrates américains achève un cycle ouvert avec le combat de Martin Luther King pour les droits civiques, analyse l'ancien chef de la diplomatie congolaise, Gérard Kamanda wa Kamanda.
"Qu'il gagne la course à la Maison Blanche ou non, l'investiture de Barack Obama est déjà un événement politique majeur qui date la fin effective des préjugés raciaux aux Etats-Unis", selon lui.
"C'est la montée politique en puissance de la communauté afro-américaine des Etats-Unis (...) C'est le rêve de Martin Luther King en marche qui entre dans sa phase décisive. C'est aussi un signe des temps qui annonce des changements ethniques importants dans le monde au cours du troisième millénaire", prophétise Gérard Kamanda wa Kamanda.
Avant tout un Américain
Si l'enthousiasme est flagrant sur le continent à propos du succès de Barack Obama, son accession à la présidence ne signifierait pas nécessairement un changement des relations entre les Etats-Unis et l'Afrique, avertissent toutefois certains.
"Obama est un Américain avant d'être autre chose. Il n'est pas le seul à avoir ses racines en dehors des Etats-unis (...) Mais au finish, ils sont tous Américains", nuance Aboulaye Wade.
"Obama, d'origine africaine, certes, n'est nullement élu pour les Africains. Que cela soit clair. Dès le départ", souligne le quotidien gouvernemental ivoirien Fraternité Matin.
Fallimento di Africom?
- Dall'articolo "U.S. Africa Command Trims Its Aspirations" (Karen DeYoung, The Washington Post, 1 giugno 2008):
The U.S. Africa Command, designed to boost America's image and prevent terrorist inroads on the continent, has scaled back its ambitions after African governments refused to host it and aid groups protested plans to expand the military's role in economic development in the region.
Africom, due to begin operations Oct. 1, will now be based for the foreseeable future in Stuttgart, Germany, with five smaller regional offices planned for the continent on hold while the military searches for places to put them.
Nonmilitary jobs, created within Africom to highlight new cooperation between the Pentagon and the State Department, have been hard to fill and will initially total fewer than 50 of 1,300 headquarters personnel. Plans to broaden the military's more traditional overseas training and liaison responsibilities to include development and relief tasks were curbed after U.S.-funded aid groups sharply objected to working alongside troops.
"I think in some respects we probably didn't do as good a job as we should have when we rolled out Africom," Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said recently, adding that "I wasn't there" when the command was conceived by his predecessor, Donald H. Rumsfeld, and approved by President Bush.
"I don't think we should push African governments to a place they don't really want to go in terms of relationships," Gates said.
Planning for Africom began in early 2006, when the Bush administration designated Africa an area of "strategic concern" and policymakers cited a number of "pre-conflict" situations there. Based on lessons learned in Iraq and Afghanistan, where the U.S. military is deeply involved in civil affairs and economic development efforts, Africom was fashioned as a template for a new interagency structure that would coordinate "hard" and "soft" U.S. power.
U.S. Agency for International Development personnel were assigned to Africom, and a senior State Department diplomat was named one of two command deputies under Army Gen. William E. "Kip" Ward. Not only would Africom help make Africa secure, Bush said when he unveiled it in February 2007, it would help promote "development, health, education, democracy and economic growth."
Africa has always been an orphan in the U.S. defense establishment, divvied up among the Pentagon's four regional "Unified Combatant Commands" -- European, Central, Southern and Pacific -- that manage U.S. military relationships and operations overseas. Of the four, only Eucom, established in post-World War II Germany, is based overseas. Pacom handles Asia from its headquarters in Hawaii; Southcom, responsible for Latin America, and Centcom, in charge of operations in the Middle East and Central Asia, are both in Florida.
Under Africom, one command will consolidate military responsibility for all of Africa, excluding Egypt. Although it encompasses the volatile Horn of Africa and the U.S. Navy's forward operating base in Djibouti and will take over training tasks on the continent, it has no other dedicated troop components. "There are very few scenarios which would create a U.S. military intervention" in Africa, said one Africom officer who was not authorized to speak on the record. "Arguably, there are no scenarios."
With its headquarters on the continent, liaison groups of 20 to 30 military personnel established in key countries and U.S. units brought in to help with development and relief tasks, the command was envisioned as an example to Africans of how their own armed forces and civilians could work together for the good of their nations.
The trouble was, no one consulted the Africans. "Very little was really known by the majority of people or countries in Africa who were supposed to know before such a move was made," said retired Kenyan army Lt. Gen. Daniel Opande. Worry swept the continent that the United States planned major new military installations in Africa.
"If you know the politics of Africa," said Opande, who has headed U.N. peacekeeping forces in Sierra Leone and Liberia, "you know there are certain very powerful countries who said, no, we are not interested in having a headquarters here." South Africa and Nigeria were among them, and their resistance helped persuade others.
Over the past seven years, the administration has more than tripled U.S. assistance to Africa, to about $9 billion annually, nearly half of which is spent on prevention and treatment for HIV-AIDS. U.S. military training for African forces has steadily expanded, and U.S. troops have undertaken humanitarian missions in several countries -- digging wells, building schools and providing medical care. Africom's budget request for 2009 is about $400 million.
But despite the promise of new development and security partnerships, many Africans concluded that Africom was primarily an extension of U.S. counterterrorism policy, intended to keep an eye on Africa's large Muslim population.
"I think everyone thought it would be widely greeted as something positive," the Africom officer said. "But you suddenly have wide publics that have no idea what we're talking about. . . . It was seen as a massive infusion of military might onto a continent that was quite proud of having removed foreign powers from its soil."
The United States "equates terrorism with Islam," senior Kenyan diplomat Bethuel Kiplagat said, and few African governments wanted to be seen as inviting U.S. surveillance on their own people.
Russell Feingold (D-Wis.), who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations African affairs subcommittee, thought Africom was "something that would show real respect for Africa." But there was no question, Feingold said, that the concept had "a neocolonialist feel to it."
The subject was at the top of African leaders' agendas when Bush visited in February. "The purpose of this is not to add military bases," he told reporters after meeting with Ghanian President John Kufuor. By Bush's own account, Kufuor confronted him, saying, "You're not going to build any bases in Ghana." Bush told reporters that the very idea of establishing such bases was "baloney. Or as we say in Texas, that's bull."
At home, major U.S. nongovernmental aid organizations protested that what might work in the Iraq war zone -- where government civilian-military "provincial reconstruction teams" operate together under heavy security to build local governing capacity and infrastructure -- was ill-suited for non-conflict zones. Not only would a military presence draw unwanted attention and increased risk for development workers, they argued, the military had neither the training nor the staying power for effective development.
"Is the face of America in Africa a baseball cap or a helmet?" asked Samuel A. Worthington, president of Interaction, the Washington-based umbrella for many development and relief organizations. "We told the military -- do what you're good at. Stay in your lane."
Since last year's announcement, senior U.S. officials have been trying to make up for what they acknowledge was a bad beginning. There has been a "retooling" of the mission, the Africom officer said, away from development and toward "peacekeeper training, military education, a counterterrorism element -- programs that have been going on for some time."
"I'll be candid with you: There was a misunderstanding of sorts," said Ward, Africom's commander. African governments he has visited since his confirmation last fall, he said, wanted to know "were we going to be establishing large bases, bringing in large formations of troops, naval bases and air squadrons? My answer was no."
To USAID and other U.S. government development partners, worried that the military's vast human and financial resources would overshadow them, Ward said he has explained that "we absolutely have no intention of being the leader in doing development on the continent of Africa. It is not our job, not our lane. We have no intention of taking over."
