Insignificant Tuesday

In the name of change, over the next two years, American voters may only get a tinkering with policy on the margins

Tuesday does not matter. Yes, Democrats have taken the House and, as this is going to press, look like taking the Senate. But the next two years will witness the insignificance of Tuesday.

Democrats, throughout the campaign, focused on the Iraq war and did not tackle the larger issues of a war on terror. Today, America8217;s 8220;war on terror8221; enjoys bipartisan support and helps to explain the insignificance of yesterday. Both parties support a war on terror, a remilitarised America and a narrow definition of national security. Everyone freshly remembers John Kerry in 2004, and the Democrats in general, making a campaign against a war they supported in the vote. One cannot forget that Homeland Security was a Democratic idea adopted by a Republican president. Indeed, the US intelligence community did not need reorganisation and did in fact accurately predict the threat of Osama and Al Qaeda. The August 6, 2001 presidential daily briefing is testimony. Republicans and Democrats represent the same interests, the market. In the name of national security, wars, throughout the cold war and now war on terror, have enjoyed bipartisan support.

Policy stalwarts agree the election will not make much of a difference for American foreign policy. Historically, and specially in the six decades since the end of World War II, they cite a continuity in US foreign policy on the use of military force in international affairs. All administrations only change policy around the margins, sometimes proving important.

Therefore, after 60 years of their demonstrated commitment, it is clear the Democratic and Republican Party cannot offer an alternative. The problem for American citizenry is who and what to believe, as all the information they are getting is second hand 8212; only 20 per cent of Americans currently hold passports compared to 50 per cent of Canadians. One in five of the population holds a passport and can see firsthand what 8220;America8221; is like abroad. US Senator Barack Obama notes, 8220;In the nineties, the basic feeling was, you know, as long as McDonald8217;s are opening up all over the world everything8217;s going to be OK. And then we had 9/11, and launched into a unilateral, sabre-rattling approach to foreign policy.8221; But most Americans have never seen the American market abroad to understand what is at stake and to make sense of the national response to 9-11.

Abroad, the key is to ask why democracy is important in Iraq and US foreign policy. The colour revolutions explain just that. Democracy as a foreign policy goal is important for at least two reasons: means and market. Both parties are actively promoting 8220;democracy8221; abroad further developing their means to influence the domestic agendas of other states. As this enjoys bipartisan support, as long as there is this bipartisan reality, this feature will persist. Influencing the domestic agenda is key and this leads to the second reason. As the state creates the market, however closed or open, influencing domestic agenda is an integral part of shaping the market8217;s space.

Americans demonstrated yesterday that they want change and hopefully they will closely follow these next two years. Domestically Tuesday will be telling, as Democrats take the helm, the American citizenry will witness anew this continuity and hopefully this time act. But the hopes for this are great, once the 8220;cultural war8221; myth is dispelled. The myth of a culture war in the US is due to the misinterpretation of elections results, lack of hard examination of polling data, systematic and self-serving misrepresentation by issue activists, and selective coverage by an uncritical media more concerned with news value than getting the story right. Americans in fact are moderate in view and tolerant in manner. The tragic irony is that the majority of American citizenry are in the same position as most of the citizens of the developing world: trying to stay out of the crossfire of the 8220;Left8221; and 8220;Right.8221; Perhaps common cause among the global electorate will be realised in the next decades. For now, the US electorate, and the international community, needs a real choice and leadership.

The writer is professor, world affairs, State University of New York FIT and a visiting fellow at Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi. The article is co-authored with Marta Vanduzer-Snow, an independent scholar based in New York and New Delhi