Richardson & Fast Track Barack - New Style in US President's Decision Making

With the withdrawal of New Mexico Governor Bill Richardon, we may well see a new style in decision making for the US Chief Executive. I would call that style Fast Track Barack.

While not acknowledging any wrongdoing, the governor clearly was under guidance to do so from the president-elect's team of advisors. Adverse consequences due to any delays in appointing someone for the position of Commerce Secretary, at a time of global economic crisis seems to have been the prevailing rationale, and it is with welcome words that the President-elect Obama still looks forward to seeing Richardson serve in the future once all current investigations have been carried out.


We hope therefore in other equally important matters, Barack Obama will be able to use this fast tracking style of executive decision making not entirely dissimilar to his immediate predecessor, although perhaps with more carefully thought of considerations.



How will Barack Obama act in the current crisis in Gaza, which likely will still be an issue when he assumes office ? Do you think he will be willing to act in a firm and resolute manner towards both the Palestinians and Israelis for the immediate cessation of violence ? We certainly hope that will be the case.



Or for that matter, will the future President be taking an effective stance on a resurgent China? Or with a defiant Russia who undermines the United States' influence whenever she finds an opportunity? We have seen the visit of Russian naval warships in the Western hemisphere as one of the latest snubs on American exclusivity in the Region. Not to mention the more than welcoming Venezuelans and their leader Hugo Chavez who have been extremely friendly with Russia for seemingly no other matter than just to spite America.


Will the next President close the chapter on Iraq's occupation in an effective and peaceful way? The rest of the world certainly would like to put faith on that thought.


When dealing with the Big Three of the Automotive industry, will the president make decisions which are not only smart but have long lasting impact thus going down in history as the saviour of the industry; or will he be forever remembered as the one who hammered the final nail into their coffins?

There are just over two weeks until Barack Obama's inauguration, and the entire world looks still favourably at the changing of guard between heavy-handed politics and this new and effective style of decision making. Despite being a lay person, I pray that Barack Obama will have the conviction in him to make the right decisions, not just the popular ones with the folks back home, which will be serving not only American interests, but to the extent possible, those of the rest of the people in this planet. After all, with his cosmopolitan roots, how can he not help being able to put himself in another person's shoes?

The risky thing is that with the whole American nation watching him, there are those within it who would gladly see him trip up at the earliest opportunity. Let's hope that he will be able to masterfully overcome those hurdles, be serving his people whilst at the same time not putting the rest of us at risk of an invasion, further economic turmoil or what ever other calamity may befall.

E Pluribus Unum and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika - What Differences Exist Between Them

Can you imagine a Eurasian or an ethnic Chinese becoming President of Indonesia? Would you dare to think it possible that one day, we will swear in a president who is Hindu, Buddhist or even a Christian in this country? "Change we can believe in." That's certainly been a catchy phrase in 2008, especially in the US leading up to Barack Hussein Obama's election as President. Wouldn't it be great to see a similar phenomenon happening in the country which must have partly influenced his life in some way? Or could it be that this has already touched us, everyday Indonesians, and other citizens of the world?

Indonesia shares the same motto as that of the United States. E Pluribus Unum and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika both mean Unity Through Diversity expressed through Latin and Sanskrit respectively. How is it then, that the US has seen an African American elected as the Commander-in-Chief, while in Indonesia, constitutionally there is no way anyone not considered "native" can ever be elected president? You may remember the times leading up to President Wahid's election in Indonesia, where the electoral majority failed to guarantee the placement of Megawati on the number one seat in the Republic, the first time around. United, they did not stand, save to oppose the election of the first female president in this country, though it eventually occurred. So much for commonalities of mottos then, between them.

As we see a presidential election completed in America, and one about to unfold in Indonesia, it very interesting to see some elements which sets the two apart and those which put them together.

Both nations can be considered a melting pot of a variety of cultures. One, predominantly Anglo Saxon in culture and heritage; the other essentially an amalgam of feudal Malay and Melanesian states, legacy of ancient Austronesian kingdoms such as Srivijaya & Majapahit. Both nations fought for their independence, and one can argue that the spirit of the Indonesian revolution was inspired by the American War of Independence, as in the case of many modern nation-states.

One fundamental difference is in how the two peoples recognize diversity. In essence, both Indonesia and the US are comprised of a nation of immigrants. Indonesia has a complex web of overlapping ethnic and racial intermingling spurring further changes in the social and cultural landscape of the nation. Predominant ethnic groups arise as a result, most notably the Javanese, Sundanese, Batak, Minangkabau and Buginese, which are not only influential culturally and politically but are numerous among the population. Yet, Indonesia did not overtly attempt to let any cultural majority dominate.

On a fundamental topic such as language for example, while the Javanese form roughly half of the Indonesian population, the Founding Fathers of Indonesia had the wisdom not to impose a cultural hegemony and instead opted to continue the practice of using the Malay dialect which later developed as Bahasa Indonesia as the official language. Common sense prevailed over any chauvinistic tendencies to superimpose any majority, at least on a superficial level. That has left a semblance of tolerance and respect for diversity. In the history of the nation however, that tolerance has seen both highs and lows, with the current situation allowing for a resurgence of less tolerant sentiments. The emphasis on ethnicity and/or religious identity arguably has never been stronger than today, with matters being fueled by a larger role in the regional/local autonomy propagated by the government as well as local politics with increased democracy bulding up over a decade since the advent of Reformasi. In Indonesia, this increased polarization of self-interests has been a key byproduct of an ongoing experiment in liberal democracy.

America instead has largely inherited the legacy of its Puritan Founding Fathers: creating a great nation out of a mix of peoples led by a White, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant oligarchy. Even with a much more demographically varied population today in comparison to nation's founding over 230 years ago, the heart of American culture has not belied those firmly entrenched roots. Furthermore, the American people have never been hesitant to demonstrate that whenever the chance arises. Diversity is recognized within a more defined and fixed framework. Thus, it is relatively irrelevant whether an American is from any particular gender, race or ethnic or religious affiliation, so long as he/she can be a flag bearer for some strong ideals of work ethic and perseverance in American society, which dares to allow people to dream in the land of opportunity.

A significant chance occurred though in November 2008 - with the election of Barack Hussein Obama as her first African American President. Through that gesture the people of the United States have announced to the world, that it really is time to give Change a chance. The change is not that of direction or purpose, for America remains and will keep on working at being the dominant and decisive playmaker of the world. It is subtler, but gives hope for more constructivism to arise, for the methods which she will employ to enforce her interests, hopefully will be through means of soft power, and with a more sincere face to it.

Look at some historical milestones of the world's remaining superpower : The Louisiana Purchase, The Monroe Doctrine, The Civil War, The Spanish-American War, participation in both World Wars, the Cold War as an entire period, the Gulf Wars, Post 9/11 times including invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. These are moments when the United States has announced to the world that "we are going to superimpose ourselves and our way of life. Woe behold to those who stand in our way". Without going into any moral or practical reasons for any of these acts, doctrines or conflicts, we see a strong and proud nation who is trying to keep momentum of its nascent growth. For this, the United States need not be apologetic, for almost any de facto empire preceding her, we've seen the same pattern emerge again and again.

Instead, we see that America is now prepared to prolong the role of superpower along with its great responsibilities, in an ever more segmented family of nations, and even wider array of interests, by imposing herself in a more refined way, through almost the exact opposite policy of President Bush's gung-ho style of diplomacy. What better way to show the world that the United States is ready to be fair and be content with taking the role as First Among Equals, than by showing the face of the world i.e. Barack Obama, like a mirror to the rest of us?

The writer has and will continue to respect the great effort which has brought up such an exceptional person as Barack Obama into the highest Executive Office on this planet. Where matters may literally fall out of the new president's hands, could be in times requiring unity despite divergent interests of his own American people and that of the rest of the world. We face the situation in recent days, when a newly escalated level of conflict has arisen yet again between Israel and Palestine. As often happens, many fingers are being pointed in America's direction for being soft on her Israeli allies. Heavy demonstrations have occurred demanding a stronger rebuke from the US government all over Indonesia, and in some places, symbols of Pax Americana such as McDonald's were sealed by angry and idealistic protesters.

The way in which the new Chief Executive will handle this extremely delicate situation, will show us Mr.Obama's true abilities as an American statesman of the 21st century who is more in tune with the world. Lessons learnt in his childhood from his adopted Indonesia many decades ago, hopefully can present itself to him in order to handle the latest Israeli-Palestinian conflict and many others which will come along during his government which comes into place very soon. To do this, he can well look into history and take lessons from a few influential world leaders, some of whom, for reasons of principle have had to cross swords with the way America has been running the world. The same ways which (hopefully) Mr.Obama's promise of Change will seek to fundamentally alter.

Starting from Indonesia's Sukarno, who was a prominent champion of the Non Alignment Movement, Obama can learn to be impartial when facing regional conflicts in which his own nation is not under any immediate threat. He could apply genuine neutrality when dealing with both Israeli and Palestinians for a conclusive solution, which neither hears from either side of extremism, instead choosing to listen to reason above all. Enforce a long lasting consensus among Jews and Arabs, do not cave in to the Jewish lobby, the Arab lobby or any other lobby in Washington over this conflict. Broker the creation of a Palestinian State which does not have any hostile intentions to Israel. This act alone (arguably a difficult one for sure) will eliminate any extremist arguments for the elimination of Israel from the face of this earth, as espoused by some leaders in the Middle East.

From Vietnam's Ho Chi Minh, a nationalist who united his country despite a superpower's intent otherwise (while arguably enforcing Vietnam's unique brand of socialism), the US president-elect can learn how to reconcile a nation who have been separated through ideology and to leave differences behind to focus on building a stronger future together. Smaller parallels can be drawn with the American nation's divide between Democrats and Republicans leading up to the last election, yet at a time of global financial crisis as today, the message of unity must resonate more clearer than ever, in order to focus on getting the globalized economy back on a healthy and sober track, to the benefit of everyone, American or otherwise.

Lastly, from China's Deng Xiaoping - Barack Obama can learn the valuable lesson of transformation. Deng was able to harness the differences and confusion from the aftermath of the Cultural Revolution to continue on a path of development which has transformed China into what it is today, one of the strong global partners of the United States in such a short amount of time. This was achieved through constant focus on results and honing in on national strengths.

One key deliverable from this discourse above, is that despite differences between the United States and the rest of the world, namely Indonesia, in terms of the ability to influence, those differences are not mutually exclusive. Today's increasingly globalized world ensures that not only the economy, politics and culture are ever more aligned, but ideas are also commonly exchanged and enriching each other.