Wednesday, August 15, 2012

Face à Obama, Mitt Romney

Medicare et le système de santé américain sont devenus les nouveaux thèmes de prédilection de Mitt Romney. Après un début de campagne basé sur la succès économique de l’homme d’affaire, ce revirement pourrait lui porter préjudice.

Dès le début de sa campagne, il y a un an, Mitt Romney avait parié sur des atouts clairs : ce qu’il a achevé en tant que gouverneur du Massachusetts, puis à la tête de l’organisation des Jeux Olympiques d’Hiver de 2002 et, surtout, son parcours d’homme d’affaire fondateur de la société d’investissement Bain Capital.
Son expérience dans le secteur privé est la clef de la relance économique a-t-il assuré pendant des mois.
« Nous avons investi dans plus de cent entreprises et si on fait le calcul, ces business ont créé plus de 100,000 postes depuis, » Romney a-t-il déclaré en parlant de Bain Capital.
           
Mais récemment, la stratégie « self-made man » de Romney s’est effritée. Les publicités du camp démocratique ont fait de Bain leur bête noire et les publicités contre le fond d’investissement se multiplient, au détriment de l’image de Romney.
Ce qui faisait la fierté du candidat républicain est maintenant relégué au fond du placard, à côté des affaires de démantèlements d’entreprises et de licenciements massifs opérés par Bain.
A la place, Romney a zigzagué d’une semaine à l’autre entre un message et un autre, défiant une règle d’or en politique : choisir un thème et s’y tenir. Depuis quelques semaines, le système social, Medicare et l’affaire des taxes ont dominé les débats, le faisant dériver de son but premier : prouver qu’il est meilleur qu’Obama pour gérer l’économie du pays.

Le candidat républicain a bien un argumentaire économique fort, conteste le directeur stratégique de sa campagne Stuart Stevens. Romney se concentre sur les emplois, dit-il, et propose une vision claire et différente de celle d’Obama : ne pas compter sur le gouvernement pour régler les problèmes de la société.


La convention républicaine, du 27 au 30 août, sera un nouveau départ pour le candidat républicain, qui n’aura plus le choix et devra présenter une ligne d’attaque directe et définie de sa politique.

Article rédigé et publié sur http://franceusamedia.com/

Thursday, August 2, 2012

PUB, PUB, PUB

 Deux associations à but non lucratif, Crossroads GPS et Americans for Prosperity, ont investi presque 60 millions de dollars en publicités télévisées pour la campagne présidentielle jusqu’à maintenant. Ce chiffre dépasse les sommes combinées des Super PACs (Political Action Committee).

Ces groupes, à la différence des PACs, n’ont pas à révéler le nom de leurs donneurs.
Une étude réalisée par  Kantar Media’s Campaign Media Analysis Groupe (KMCMAG) et analysée par le site d’information ProPublica a trouvé que Crossroad GPS et Americans for Prosperity ont dépensé plus d’argent que n’importe quelle autre organisme, y compris les syndicats, les PACs et les partis politiques eux-mêmes.

Les Super Pacs ont consacré près de 55,7 millions de dollars dans des spots TV mentionnant le nom d’un candidat à la présidentielle, selon la même étude. Les partis ont quant à eux un budget plus restreint, avec « seulement » 22,5 millions de dollars consacrés aux pubs télévisées.
Crossroad GPS est l’invention du stratégiste républicain Karl Rove, et s’est déjà allégé, selon une estimation de KMCMAG,  de 41,7 millions de dollars. Americans for prosperity, qui a aidé à lancé le mouvement du Tea Party, est en parti soutenu par les frères milliardaires David et Charles Koch, qui ont dépensé 18,2 millions de dollars.

Les supporters d’une réforme du financement des campagnes politiques affirment que la montée en puissance de ces deux groupes illustre le rôle que les dons anonymes jouent dans cette élection,  dans une proportion encore jamais vue dans l’histoire des Etats-Unis.

“Tout d’abord, cela montre combien le désir de garder l’anonymat est fort parmi les donneurs. Ils veulent être capables d’influencer les élections, mais sans laisser de traces, » commente Fred Wertheimer, leader du groupe Democracy 21, un organisme de contrôle. « Ensuite, cela montre que pour l’instant, il y a un énorme avantage concentré entre les mains de deux groupes qui exercent une influence injuste sur ces élections. »
Le porte-parole de Crossroad GPS, Jonathan Collegio, défend le pouvoir de son organisation. Selon lui, la charge de Wertheimer est influencée par ses positions politiques. « Les partisans libéraux attaquent les groupes de soutien conservateurs alors que nous faisons la même chose que ce que les groupes environnementaux, ceux anti-guerre, ou les syndicats font depuis des années, sans jamais être inquiétés. »
 Article rédigé et publié sur http://franceusamedia.com/



Wednesday, August 1, 2012

In Syria, some people die, some people shop


February 2012.
Hundreds of Syrian people, most of them civilians, died since Russia and China put a veto in the UN, blocking any condemnation of the regime in Damas. Division of States won over unity. It is like reviving the Cold War, a period of time when Russia wanted to demonstrate its strength by all means, including silly ones. The most striking point is not the veto of Moscow and Beijing, but their isolation of the Syrian question. At the Security Council, 13 voices over 15 voted in favour of a nuanced condemnation, but still a condemnation, of the regime of Assad. Not only the group of Bric (Brazil, Russia, China and India) burst, but the Arab world also supported the humanitarian resolution brought by occidentals and were outraged by the Russian and Chinese behaviour.
Why does Moscou chose to be isolated? Of course, Poutine can count on the fact that Assad’s regime (with the help of his Russian and Iranian allies) will crush the opposition, under armed and divided. Poutine can consider, wrongly, that the popular uprising in Syria is anything but a western conspiracy aimed at weakening Syria. One day, Poutine may pay the price of his paranoia, not only in Syria, but in the entire Arab world.
 If Russia struggles to realize the Arab Spring actually happened, it is also because Russians have been demonstrating for months against Poutine, even within Russia. A few weeks ago, Muscovite demonstrators were taking to the streets waving banners tagged “Moubarak, Kadhafi, Poutine”. It sounded like a warning of a new kind. Poutine’s party will certainly be elected one more time next month, but his power is undermined and Poutine himself is increasingly contested. A weak regime, weighting as heavy as it can to save a dying regime only has the power to harm. Russia can provide to Assad a few months of respite, but Russia can’t save Assad.
The double veto of Russia and China (the latter following the former and ready to find out any diplomatic ruse existing) push the international community, behind the UN, to show firmness and imagination. First of all, there is a need to harden economic sanctions against Damas, and then to keep on pressuring Moscow and Beijing. Why? In order to convince them that another solution would not necessarily mean that their interest in Syria will be endangered in the long term.
Is there any need to go further? Is it the role of the UN to overtly arm rebels, establishing humanitarian areas and pushing the several branches of the Syrian opposition to unify? Syria is neither Libya geographically speaking, politically or militarily.
Today, a president is massacring his citizens. During that time Asma, Bachar Al Assad’s wife, shops and buys Louboutin shoes. Like the French humorist Stephane Guillon puts it, what is the point of spending a fortune on shoes because their soles are red? Asma could, instead, buy regular shoes and walk on the street. With all the blood wasted because of her husband, it would not take long before her soles get red.

Islam and the danger of putting people into boxes

March 2012


Mobarack Al-Fawaz is a man, a student, a soccer player. Mobarack is also a Muslim, but that fact should not be the only one determining what other people think of him.

It is a sunny day in Greeley, Colorado. Eighty degrees and a slight wind: spring is definitely here. “It is chilly around here!” says Mobarak Al-Fawaz, sat under the shadow of an oak. Mobi, for his friends. Dark hair, bubbly brown eyes and skinny body, the student studying English always splits his face with a smile.

Today, because he is wearing a tee-shirt of the Liverpool soccer team, anyone would think he is English. Sometimes, when he eats a hamburger at Wendy’s, anyone would think he is American. At other times, when he is tired of cooking and buys dozens of packs of ramen noodles, anyone would think he is Chinese. But five times per day, Al-Fawaz is definitely a Sunni believer coming from Saudi Arabia. 

Between Al-Fawaz and the grass, a blue rug has been unfolded. The 19-year-old student has been carrying it everywhere he has gone since he was nine. Five times per day, he kneels on it and repeats the parts of the Koran he believes in. He must have made the same gesture thousands of times, most of them in the heat of a south Saudi Arabian village called Abha. In Abha, there are only Sunnites. In Abha, no one talks about Shiites.  In Abha, Al-Fawaz never sees in the newspapers what is happening in the east of the country.

When he arrived in the US, about six months ago, Al-Fawaz could hardly ask for a glass of water. Today, he cannot tell a lot about the conflict between Shiites and Sunnites, but it is not because of a lack of vocabulary.

Most of the Shiites living in Saudi Arabia are established in the east of the country. Thought to be 10% of the overall 19 million Saudi Arabians, Shiites find their roots in Iran, a country bordering Saudi Arabia. Many reports are clear: Shiites suffer from being excluded from important jobs in the industry, politics, economics, etc. “There are no problems with Shiites,” says Al-Fawaz.

The Saudi Arabian monarch, Abdallah Bin-Abd-al-Aziz, recently became aware that it was not trendy being a Monarch anymore. To avoid an Arab Spring in his country, he distributed billions of dollars to build houses for young couples, and to increase their annual salary. He also accused Shiites from the East of the country of supporting Iran, rather than Saudi Arabia. King Abdallah required Saudi Arabian Shiites to choose between being loyal to their country, or to their religious chief, Ayatollah Khomeini, who is also the religious chief of Iran. A report released by the minister of the interior made it clear that anyone choosing the second one would pay for it. But still. “There are no problems with Shiites,” says Al-Fawaz.

King Abdallah sent soldiers into Bahrain to help the government crushing an uprising led by Shiites. But once again, “there are no problems with Shiites.”
After all, how would Al-Fawaz know about all of these events? He recognizes that he is not fond of reading the newspapers, or just reading. Like any other boy of his age, Al-Fawaz prefers to play soccer with his friends rather than reading about equal rights and politics. Here in his garden, or in a stadium, Al-Fawaz focuses more on how to control a ball rather than how to control a conflict.

Always smiling, Al-Fawaz does not know what he should be mad at, or worrying about. “King Abdullah is good. Nothing like the Arab Spring would ever happen in Saudi Arabia,” says Al-Fawaz. An Arab Spring, why? The young man does not seem to see the point of it. Even after six month passed in the US, Al-Fawaz is still supportive of his king. When asked if he does not prefer democracy to monarchy, the dark-brown eyebrows of the boy shiver. “Democracy? Sorry, I don’t understand the word,” says Al-Fawaz.

Democracy or not, Al-Fawaz says he does not choose his friends depending on their religion. Here in Greeley, he met Joey Ali, a Shiite student studying at the University of Colorado. Joey grew up in Koweit and then moved to the US when he was eleven. Contrary to Al-Fawaz, Ali was raised by a Catholic mother and gave up praying five times a day. Student in history, Ali explains in clear words the differences between a Shiite and a Sunnite. “It does not bother me that Mobi is Sunni, and I don’t think it bothers him that I am Shiite, but the fact that a Shiite can be friends with a Sunni surely does bother governments in the Middle East, like Saudi Arabia and Iran,” says Ali.

Funnily enough, Ali figured out that Al-Fawaz was Sunnite really simply. “He told me he was from Saudi Arabia, and since only Sunnis in Saudi Arabia would ever have the chance to study abroad, I simply made the link,” says Ali.

Even if both of them are Muslim, Al-Fawaz and Ali have never prayed together. Sometimes, they would smoke a cigarette, talking about the best way to win in a video game. Some other times, Ali would drink a beer, Al-Fawaz holding a can of Coke or a glass of juice. Islam is not one unified religion. Al-Fawaz and Ali cannot be put in the same box tagged “Muslim”. Muslims fight for their rights. Muslims are unfair kings. Muslims are kids playing soccer. Muslims are bullies and bullied. Muslims are Ali, who stands up in class to offer a Shiite point of view when talking about Islam. Muslims are Al-Fawaz, a kid wearing a Liverpool tee-shirt, smiling and playing the PlayStation.

A revolution experienced 6,248 miles away

February 2012.

Nasser Almsmari arrived in the United States in 2010. The only Libya he ever experienced is a Gadhafi one. 6,248 miles away from his home, Almsmari still endures the aftermath of the revolution.

7:40 a.m.
The sun has not been up for long when Almsmari leaves his apartment. At the rear of his grey car, five inch icicles hung. His right hand turning the key to ignite the engine, his left one grabs a cigarette from a Marlboro pack. As he drives his way to the university, Nasser points to his bumper.
“It is not because you can’t eat oil that it is not a vital resource. Oil mattered a lot in the Libyan revolution,” Almsmari says. He takes a drag, blows the smoke out the open window.
“We want to sell oil, of course. But only to our friends, those who helped us rise up against Gadhafi.” 

1:20 p.m.
With a shy smile, Almsmari leaves his classroom. “I just had a test. Eighteen pages reading about George Washington.”
Next to him, sits Rajab Suliman, another student from Libya. Among the Greeley Libyan community, Suliman is more known as “Libya Online”, his pseudo on Facebook. The 33-year-old English student opened this page on the social network the day the Libyan Revolution began. 
Afraid of suffering backfire from his government, Suliman hid his identity behind an impersonal name.
“Staying here is hard when there is so much going on in your country. I wanted to create a link between my friends in Libya and those here,” Suliman says.
Today, different concerns feed the Libya Online page: news about gas, oil and above all the constitution of a new government.

4 p.m.
Before entering his apartment, Almsmari takes off his shoes and his wife, Amal, greets him in the living room. The room is small and has few personal belongings. It is occupied by a small table with four chairs surrounding it, a TV that stands alone on top of a cabinet with a cream couch and an arm chair which has no resemblance to the latter dispersed behind a coffee table.
In the big empty space two little boys play, running after each other.
The only personal decoration seems to be the tri-colored horizontal striped Libyan flag, centralized by a star and a crescent moon. Staring at it, Almsmari remembers the one he brought to an international meeting, before the revolution.
“It was the green flag of Gadhafi. After the Revolution, I felt freer to bring the one symbolizing Libya and not Gadhafi.”Revolution changed more than the color of a flag in Almsmari’s life. “Before, I would have never talked about politics. I was too scared that the government could reach me anywhere.”

Just before 6 o’clock:
Almsmari follows the news visiting websites such as Al-Jazeera, Al Arabia, Free Libya, and sometimes CNN. After a quick glance at his watch, he stands up and explains that at 6 o’clock, it is time for prayer.
Before leaving the living room, he remembers the first time he heard about the revolution in his country was through Facebook.
“Make this day be the day of anger” wrote one of his friends in Libya. It was February 17th 2011. Since that day, Almsmari never stopped wanting to go back to Libya, “but the best way to help my people is to come back educated, knowing what democracy is,” he said.

Sunday, July 15, 2012

Un socialiste à la Maison Blanche ?


«  Je m’appelle Stewart Alexander, je suis socialiste et candidat à la  présidence des Etats-Unis. »  Quelques applaudissement, des sifflets et  un homme au tee-shirt rouge décrochant un droit à la Tigger Woods : bienvenue au rassemblement des partis de mouvance socialiste de Californie.
La chaleur est étouffante, et l’air climatisé cassé. Malgré la moiteur de la pièce où se pressent une soixantaine de personnes dans un joyeux brouhaha, Stewart Alexander garde sa veste noire. La couleur de la veste s’accorde à son pantalon, son polo, ses chaussettes et ses chaussures soigneusement cirées. Seul un fin liseré rouge sur  son col vient troubler cette sombre harmonie. Cet Afro-américain de 55 ans a la voix grave et le regard sérieux de ceux qui veulent convaincre.
« Nous sommes les 99%. Nous sommes les travailleurs. Nous devrions gouverner ce pays ! » lance Stewart, encouragé dans sa tirade par les hochements de têtes convaincus de l’assemblée. « Nous », c’est le Parti Socialiste des Etats-Unis, créé en 1973 après l’implosion du Parti Socialiste Américain. 1500 adhérents répartis dans les cinquante-et-un états, mais aucun sénateur ou député. Stewart Alexander en est le candidat présidentiel pour novembre 2012.
Ici, dans cette petite annexe d’une Eglise rénovée, l’homme se défend plutôt bien : il veut retirer les troupes d’Afghanistan, réduire de 50% les dépenses militaires, rendre l’éducation gratuite et autoriser le mariage homosexuel.
Mais Stewart s’essouffle, et commence à butter sur ses mots. A ce moment précis, la réalité frappe aux yeux : Stewart n’est pas un politicien. Comme un job à mi-temps, ce commercial en automobiles a endossé le rôle de candidat à la présidence, mais sans formation et sans moyens financiers, il ne ferait pas le poids face à Mitt Romney ou à Barack Obama. Là-dessus, Stewart est lucide.
« Est-ce que je vais gagner ? Bien sûr que non! Mais cette campagne nous donne une voix, une position grâce à laquelle on peut communiquer sur nos idées et montrer ce que le socialisme a à offrir. »
Même cela, c’est un peu optimiste selon Steven Hill, auteur de « Europe’s promise ». Le politologue ne mâche pas ses mots. « Si je devais choisir un seul mot pour décrire le parti socialiste, ce serait : inexistant ! Le PS n’a aucun impact aux Etats-Unis. Ils se nomment eux-mêmes « parti », mais ils ne peuvent même pas être élus. » Sans concessions, il poursuit. « J’admire leur motivation mais en tant qu’analyste, j’étudie leur rôle dans la société, et même pendant la crise, ils n’en ont pas eu. »

Mais Stewart est confiant. Pour appuyer sa vision optimiste, il cite un sondage réalisé par le Pew Research Center en décembre 2011. Selon cette étude, 31% des Américains voient le socialisme d’un œil positif. Une première, quand on se souvient de la chasse anti-communistes perpétrée pendant la guerre froide et qui a laissé des traces dans la mentalité de nombreux Américains.  Preuve en est, le mot « socialiste » est utilisé comme une insulte dans le vocabulaire politique. « C’est comme traiter quelqu’un de nazi, explique Steven Hill. Quand Barack Obama est accusé par le camp adverse d’être un socialiste, il est en faite accusé de vouloir s’immiscer dans la vie des gens et de vouloir tout diriger. » Le politologue relativise les résultats du sondage. «Beaucoup d’Américains aiment le socialisme comme ils aiment les parfums de glace : quelque chose qui n’a pas d’importance. Ils ne savent ce que « socialisme » veut dire. Ce sondage montre surtout qu’ils dénigrent l’ultra-capitalisme, mais ils ne voteront pas socialiste pour autant. »

L’élection d’un socialiste à la tête de la France réjouit Stewart Hill, mais cela s’arrête là.
L’un comme l’autre, le candidat et le politologue refusent l’amalgame entre les deux partis.
« Nous sommes d’accord avec le système français de santé et d’éducation, mais ces socialistes là pensent  que le capitalisme est bon alors qu’ici, nous nous battons contre. »
Un point de vue partagé, une fois n’est pas coutume, par Steven Hill. « Le parti socialiste français,  parce qu’il gouverne, se doit d’être consensuel. Leur position sur l’échiquier politique français est bien plus centrée que celle de leurs homologues américains. »

Stewart ne désespère de voir son parti arriver, un jour, aux marches de la Maison Blanche. « On pourrait gagner, rêve Stewart Alexander à voix haute. Et d’ajouter dans un grand rire : « Quel bazar nous attendrait ! »

Article rédigé et publié sur http://franceusamedia.com/

Thursday, March 22, 2012


I have always been captivated by religions and their impact on societies and human beings. Therefore, I naturally chose to focus my interest on this issue, and more particularly on the Arab Spring, to cover my beats, due for my Advanced Journalism class at the University of Northern Colorado.

My first article had to be a “Day in life story”. Clearly, I had to follow someone related to my beat during an entire day. 

Because at that time Egyptian people were celebrating the first anniversary of their uprising, I wanted to highlight the evolutions that occurred since the revolution happened. But I found myself stuck because there was no Egyptian community in Greeley. Not even an exchange student!

My reaction was to contact Syrian persons living in Greeley. Remember: Syrian people are currently fighting for liberty against the tyrant Bashar Al-Assad. One more time, however, I could not find any Syrian in Greeley.

My third choice was to talk with Libyans. Like Egypt and Tunisia, Libyan people overthrew their president. In the case of Libya, an angry crowd killed Muammar Gaddafi, at the head of the country since 42 years, after months of civil war.

When I met Nasser Almsmari and his wife, I was captivated by what they told me. The freedom they experienced since Gaddafi died was shocking. Almsmari even confessed that he would not have done this interview before the revolution, even being in the US.

The second part of my beat is quite different. After having highlighted the political side, I want to bring on the forefront the conflictbetween Sunnis and Shiites in the Middle-East, more precisely in Saudi Arabia. To cover this subject, the help of my friend Mobarack Al-fawaz is precious: he will tell me all about his childhood and what being Sunnis means today in the US.