Dialog International

Obama and the Iranian Protests

President Obama has come under relentless attack by the neocon establishment in Washington for not being more forceful or vocal in supporting the protest over the fraudulent election in Iran.  Today the Washington Post published another attack column by torture apologist Charles Krauthammer:

"Millions of Iranians take to the streets to defy a theocratic dictatorship that, among its other finer qualities, is a self-declared enemy of America and the tolerance and liberties it represents. The demonstrators are fighting on their own, but they await just a word that America is on their side. And what do they hear from the president of the United States? Silence."

Most of the commentators in the German press have taken a longer view of the situation in Iran.  Those who look for improved relations between the US and Iran realize it will be long and difficult process that will last long after the protests have died down.  Christoph Bertram has a good op/ed piece in Die Zeit on the challenge for President Obama -  Neuanfang mit dem alten Feind / A New Beginning with an Old Enemy:

Obama muss vielmehr Mut beweisen, die eigenen Überzeugungen durchzusetzen, auch gegen Widerstände im eigenen Land. Wer ein neues Verhältnis zu Iran  anstrebt, darf sich nicht allein in der Atomfrage festbeißen, sondern muss bereit sein, die gesamte Breite der Beziehungen zu erörtern. Wer Respekt zur Grundlage des Dialogs machen will, darf nicht schon jetzt neue Wirtschaftssanktionen androhen, falls der Iran sich amerikanischen Wünschen nicht fügt. Und wer die Herausforderung ernst nimmt, iranisches Misstrauen zu überwinden, darf nicht zu schnell Ergebnisse erwarten und verlangen, (Obama really has to demonstrate that he has the courage of his convictions, even if he encounters resistance at home. Anyone who strives for a new relationship with Iran cannot simply keep harping on the nuclear issue, but rather must be prepared to discuss the complete spectrum of relations. Whoever wishes to base dialogue on mutual respect cannot turn around and threaten Iran with new economic sanctions if it doesn’t conform with the wishes of the U.S. And whoever is serious about the challenge of overcoming Iranian mistrust cannot expect or demand quick results.)

Read my complete translation at Watching America.

Habermas on America's "Hopper-Like" Melancholy

The German philosopher Jürgen Habermas was recently in the US and witnessed the financial crisis here up close.  In an interview in Die Zeit Habermas invokes one of my favorite American painters to describe the mood here:

Über die Bildschirme flimmerte die hoppersche Melancholie der Endlosschleife langer Reihen verlassener Häuschen in Florida und anderswo – mit dem Schild »Foreclosure« im Vorgarten. (A Hopper-like melancholy fickered across the television screens  with a  seemingly endless loop of of long rows of abandoned houses in Florida and elsewhere with "Foreclosure" signs on their front lawn.)

I had no idea that Edward Hopper was so popular in Germany that his name could be used as an adjective in a newspaper without any explanation required.

By the way, the entire interview is worth reading and the folks at Sign and Sight were kind enough to provide a translation in English. Habermas sees the global crisis as another legitimation crisis for capitalism, the logical outcome of neo-liberal principles exacerbated by the disasterous economic and foreign policies of the Bush administration.  The way out of the crisis, in Habermas' view, is through a new supra-national world order that can coordinate a global response.  Ironically, it is America - renewed by a watershed election - that can show the path from the ruined landscape it created:

Do we have any alternative except to bet on this draft horse? The United States will emerge weaker from the current dual crisis. However, it remains for the present the liberal superpower and it finds itself in a situation which encourages it to overhaul its neoconservative self-image as the paternalistic global benefactor. The worldwide export of its own form of life sprang from the false, centralised universalism of the Old Empires. By contrast, modernity rests upon the decentralised universalism of equal respect for everyone. It is in the interest of the United States not only to abandon its counterproductive stance towards the United Nations but to place itself at the head of the reform movement. Viewed historically, the confluence of four factors – superpower status, the oldest democracy in the world, the assumption of office of a ... liberal and visionary president, and a political culture that provides an impressive sounding board for normative impulses – represents an improbable constellation. Today America is deeply distraught by the failure of the unilateral adventure, the self-destruction of neoliberalism and the abuse of its exceptionalist consciousness. Why shouldn't this nation, as it has so often in the past, pull itself together and try to bind the competing major powers of today – the global powers of tomorrow – before it is too late into an international order that no longer needs a superpower? Why shouldn't an American president – buoyed by a watershed election – who finds that his scope for action in the domestic arena is severely constrained want to embrace this reasonable opportunity – this opportunity for reason – at least in foreign policy?

Does the Obama Era Spell the End of German Anti-Americanism?

I've always been cautious about painting Europe as anti-American.  Yes, there has always been a current of anti-Americanism in Europe, but intensity over the past years had more to do with disastrous policies of the Bush administration than with some innate animosity towards America.  Now that the Bush era has come to an end and Americans voted by a large margin for an African-American with progressive policies, will we find a more positive image of America in Germany - even among the German left?  Marina Achenbach, writing in Freitag, answers with an emphatic JA!

Auch wer skeptisch ist oder sich so gibt, ist ergriffen über die Wucht und Macht, mit der in den USA ein Wandel gewollt und angekündigt wird. Change: Dieses große Wagnis, den Kurs zu ändern. Und offen einzugestehen, wie vieles im eigenen Land kaputt gemacht wurde seit der Jahrtausendwende. (Even skeptics have to be moved by the force and power that the will to change has been shown in the US. Change: this great gamble to change course. And to openly acknowledge how much as been lost in America since the beginning of the decade.).

For Achenbach, Obama's decisive victory represents a "paradigm shift" that should be acknowledged and embraced by the German left:

Millionen Menschen, voller Bereitschaft zu persönlichem Einsatz, in politischen Gemeinschaften, die sozial neu gemischt sind, mit heutigen Formen der Kommunikation, der Orientierung, die erstmals so erprobt wurden. Inzwischen ahnen alle, die dahin schauen, dass das weitere Geschehen in den USA davon abhängt, ob sich diese Menschen wieder zurückziehen oder ob sie dabei bleiben und weiter drängen. Und dabei könnte es auch wichtig werden, von wem sie aus Europa und der Welt Ermutigung bekommen. Auch die Linken werden darunter sein. (Millions of people, fully prepared to become active in completely new political communities, using the most advanced forms of communication in ways that have never before been tried. Anyone observing the situation knows that everything depends on whether these people retreat or remain engaged and press forward. And they could certainly benefit from encouragement from Europe and the world.  Even the left can take part in this.)

Other left-oriented bloggers and journalists are likewise moved by the results of the election.  Der Spiegelfechter, normally a harsh critic, sees reasons for hope in the result - hope for a more civilized world power (die Hoffnung auf eine zivilisierte Weltmacht USA.).  But others on the German left see no reason to celebrate.  For them, the US is hell-bent on war - war against Iran and eventually war against their hero Putin.  Mit Obama in den Krieg  - "With Obama into War"  is the headline of Junge Welt. And the bloggers at Duckhome already know when the US will launch an attack on Iran - January 21, 2009, the day after Barack Obama takes office.  But attacking Iran is just a prologue of what will follow:

Natürlich kommt es irgendwann unausweichlich zu einem Waffengang mit den Russen und damit der 3. Weltkrieg. Angesichts der Tatsache, das die USA konkurs sind, und sie davon ausgehen, das der Krieg zwischen ihnen und Russland nicht atomar und auf Europa und den Nahen Osten begrenzt bleibt, ist der Krieg immer noch die Lösung, von der sie sich die Heilung all ihrer Probleme erhoffen. (Naturally this will eventually lead inexorably to a military conflict with Russia and thus World War III. In view of the fact that the US is bankrupt, and they believe that a war between the US and Russia will not be nuclear and will be contained within Europe and the Middle East, war is still the solution for all of their problems.)

Well, some things never change.

Genscher: "Obama Could Restore Trust"

Hans-Dietrich Genscher was Germany's longest-serving foreign minister and presided over the end of the cold war and the reunification of Germany.  He knows a thing or two about diplomacy. Last week the Sueddeutsche Zeitung published an interview with Genscher, where he expressed his views on the global economic crisis and on a number of other issues.  Genscher sees the current crisis as a sign that American dominance - economic and military - is erroding:

Wir erleben gerade tektonische Umbrüche in der Welt. Die Rolle der USA wandelt sich. Die Bush-Administration ist von der Fehleinschätzung ausgegangen, dass es mit dem Ende des Ost-West-Gegensatzes nur noch eine einzige Macht in der Welt gibt: die USA. Eine Macht, auf die alles fokussiert ist. Eine Macht, die alles dominiert …(We are experiencing now tectonic fissures in the world. The role of the US is changing. The Bush administration miscalculated that the end of the East-West conflict meant that there was only one global power: the US. A power on which everything is focused. A power that dominates everything...)

Instead, the Iraq debacle and the collapse of America's financial system have revealed that, in fact, we live in a multi-polar world.

In the interview, Genscher also discusses the transatlantic alliance, and how it has been damaged by the divisive policies of the Bush administration when Bush drove a wedge between "old Europe" and the new eastern NATO members.  But he is optimistic that the alliance can be repaired in an Obama administration:

Barack Obama ist nach meinem Eindruck für eine gleichberechtigte Partnerschaft offener als John McCain. Mir gefällt gut, was Obama über die transatlantische Zusammenarbeit gesagt hat: dass sie auf Augenhöhe ablaufen sollte. Er könnte als US-Präsident viel bewegen und verlorenes Vertrauen zurückgewinnen. (I have the impression that Barack Obama is more open to a more equal partnership than John McCain. I like what Obama has sadi about transatlantic cooperation: that it is a partnership of equals. As president, he could accomplish much and and restore the lost trust.)

There is much more in the interview that worth reading.

UPDATE:  Washington Post endorses Barack Obama for President. (Deutsche Zusammenfassung)

Frank Rich on the "Weimar-Like Rage" of the Palin/McCain Base

For the past week many of us have been horrified at the new tactics of the McCain campaign that have transformed the political events into a series of KuKluxKlan rallies.  New York Times columnist Frank Rich has a terrifice piece on this campaign ugliness in today's edition: The Terrorist Barack Obama:

Until now. At McCain-Palin rallies, the raucous and insistent cries of “Treason!” and “Terrorist!” and “Kill him!” and “Off with his head!” as well as the uninhibited slinging of racial epithets, are actually something new in a campaign that has seen almost every conceivable twist. They are alarms. Doing nothing is not an option.....What makes them different, and what has pumped up the Weimar-like rage at McCain-Palin rallies, is the violent escalation in rhetoric, especially (though not exclusively) by Palin. Obama “launched his political career in the living room of a domestic terrorist.” He is “palling around with terrorists” (note the plural noun). Obama is “not a man who sees America the way you and I see America.” Wielding a wildly out-of-context Obama quote, Palin slurs him as an enemy of American troops.

Rich's reference to Weimar-like rage is indeed chilling.  Last week I wrote about how the US was on the brink of economic ruin and hyper-inflation reminiscent of the early years of the Weimar Republic, when the German middle class was wiped out. The consequences in Germany were dire, and the financial crisis was blamed on "the Jews".

In his book The Pity of It All (Deutsche Ausgabe: Zu einer anderen Zeit) the historian Amos Elon writes about the tireless efforts of Germany's foreign minister - Walter Rathenau - to deal with Germany's economic crisis which was precipated, in part, by the onerous terms of the Versailles Treaty.  Rathenau, a Jew, was assassinated on the streets of Berlin on June 24, 1922.  Elon writes:

Public agitation against Rathenau had increased since he had become foreign minister in February.  The venerated General Erich Ludendorff, who...was active in extreme right-wing splinter groups, had sealed Rathenau's fate by insinuating that "the Jewish prince" had sabotaged the war effort.  The nationalist-conservative deputy Karl Helffrich had joined the attack on him in the Reichstag while, outside, rioters yelled in chorus:

Knallt ab den Walther Rathenau, Die gottverdammte Judensau!

(Kill off Walther Rathenau / The greedy goddamn Jewish sow!)

The murder, the 354th political assissination committed by right-wing extremists, shook the republic.

The McCain campaign has been saturating the air waves with political ads insinuating that Barack Obama is a terrorist sympathizer - if not a terrorist himself.  Is it any wonder that the crowds attending the Palin rallies shout "Kill him!" and "Treason"?  Will it come as surprise if some "patriot" assassinates Barack Obama "for the good of the nation"? There are plenty of "patriots" willing to carry out political murder.

John McCain's Bogus "League of Democracies"

In the first presidential debate with Barack Obama, John McCain put forward his vision of a new world order where the United States would team up with other world democracies to isolate and punish the enemies of freedom: namely Russia, Iran, North Korea, etc.

"I have proposed a league of democracies, a group of people - a group of countries that share common interests, common values, common ideals, they also control a lot of the world's economic power. We could impose significant meaningful, painful sanctions on the Iranians that I think could have a beneficial effect."

At first glance, a "league of democracies" seems like a nice departure from the unilateralism of George W. Bush. What is wrong with acting in concert with nations that share our values?  But who would be members of such a league?  Our allies in the Middle East - Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia?  These are one family dictatorships which could never be described as democracies. What about the democratically elected government of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela? Or the government of Lebanon, which includes the democratically chosen Hezbollah?

In practice McCain's "league of democracies" would be nothing more than a club of countries that the United States likes. And, while Spain may not be on this list (McCain recently seemed to say he would never meet with Zapatero), presumably Germany is. So you would think Germany would be positioning itself to be a charter member of John McCain's league of democracies. Except, that is not the case: most commentators in Germany view it as a dumb concept:

Das nationale Interesse - das meist das finanzielle ist - steht noch immer über allem, und der Frust über die Unnachgiebigkeit der jeweils anderen verleitet inzwischen sogar wieder dazu, lieber nationale oder regionale Lösungen zu suchen als globale. Wer aber, wie manche in den USA, von einer rein westlichen "Liga der Demokratien" spricht, die Russland und China ausgrenzen soll, der hat von der Globalisierung nichts verstanden. (National interest - which more often than not is economic - is paramount, and the frustration with respect to the intransigence of other competing nations often leads to national or regional solutions rather than global ones.  But those in the US who are proposing a Western "League of Democracies" that would isolate Russia and China demonstrate that they know nothing about globalization.)

And here is analysis from the journalist Knut Mellenthin:

Ferner befürwortete McCain in seinem programmatischen Artikel für Foreign Affairs die Bildung einer »weltweiten Liga der Demokratien«, wobei man den Begriff »Demokratien« nicht wörtlich verstehen sollte, sondern so, wie er von den USA schon immer gemeint war: Staaten, die im wesentlichen der US-amerikanischen Führung folgen.(In his Foreign Affairs article McCain furthermore advocated the formation of a "worldwide League of Democracies", whereby one shouldn't take the concept "Democracy" literally, but rather, as it is always intended by the US: states that in essence follow American leadership.)

Mellenthin writes that it is true intention of McCain with his proposed league to further erode the efficacy of the United Nations - despised by the neoconservative establishment in the US. In fact, the neocons - many of whom, such as Randy Sheuenemann, work for the McCain campaign - are quite open about the true intent behind the League of Democracies.  The leading neoconservative columnist Charles Krauthammer, one the most vocal advocates for bombing Iran, put it best:

"Well, I like the idea of the League of Democracies, and only in part because I and others had proposed it about six years ago. What I like about it, it's got a hidden agenda. It looks as if it's all about listening and joining with allies, all the kind of stuff you'd hear a John Kerry say, except that the idea here, which McCain can't say, but I can, is to essentially kill the UN."

McCain Mocks "Fawning Germans"

For the McCain campaign, the fact that a quarter of a million Germans turned out to see and listen to Barack Obama in Berlin is proof that Obama hates America and hates the troops. This was the statement through a McCain spokesperson:

"You know, it really speaks to the experience that Barack Obama lacks," Bounds told Fox News."He prioritizes throngs of fawning Germans over meeting with wounded combat troops in Germany," Bounds said.

The statement was immediately picked up in the German media, although the some editors diverged on the translation of "fawning Germans".  Der Spiegel went with "kriecherische Deutsche", as did the Financial Times Deutschland ("McCain kritisiert Obama-Besuch bei kriecherischen Deutschen"). The Sueddeutsche Zeitung simply used "kriecherische Deutsche" as the title of its article, where it also commented that McCain just can't get over Germany's refusal to join in the invasion of Iraq:

"Kriecherische Deutsche? Der McCain-Sprecher kann offenbar die Irakkrieg-Absage der Deutschen nicht verwinden. Und so greift er Obama an.."

Other news outlets- including the mass circulation Bild-Zeitung translated "throngs of fawning Germans" as „Haufen unterwürfige Deutsche“ - which has more a connotation of "obsequious".

Meanwhile, other outlets noted that McCain was insulting the Germans while he stepped up his rhetoric against the Russians: "McCain attakiert im US-Wahlkampf Deutsche und Russen". No doubt mocking Germans and Russians plays well with the xenophobic wing of the Republican Party.  But McCain's hostile pronouncements against Russia in particular are a bad omen of what a McCain presidency could mean for Europe.

UPDATE: Ugly Old American Insults Good-Looking Young Germans.

Less Than Zero: Bush's Farewell Visit to Germany

George W. Bush must long for the old days when a visit to Germany would bring out thousands of protesters.  Do you remember when he transformed the city of Mainz into a ghost town in 2005? Do you recall when his lightning massage of Angela caused an international uproar? And as recently as last summer a visit by Bush to the G-8 summit could cause a full-scale riot in Rostock. But now, on his farewell tour, Bush's visit is met with yawns, mixed with an equal measure of contempt and relief - relief that the nightmare of his presidency is nearly over.

Vor dem Besuch Bushs auf Schloss Meseberg bei Berlin am Dienstag und Mittwoch ist alles ganz anders. Es gibt keine Globalisierungsgegner, die Großdemonstrationen organisieren, und keine Oppositionspolitiker, die lange Forderungskataloge an den US-Präsidenten richten. Die öffentliche Aufmerksamkeit ist bisher nicht viel größer, als wenn sich ein Staatschef aus Mexiko oder Brasilien angekündigt hätte. (Ahead of the visit by Bush to the Meseberg Castle outside of Berlin on Tuesday and Wednesday everything is different this time. There are no globalization protesters organizing huge demonstrations, no politicians with their list of demands for the president.  So far the public interest in Bush's visit is not much greater than if the head of state from Mexico and Brazil were to visit.)

Mexico or Brazil?  What an insult! The FT Deutschland calls the visit more of a "wellness tour" for George and Laura Bush.  They can stroll through the gardens with Angela Merkel and her husband and not have to worry about meeting rude political leaders from the Green Party, much less the "commie" LEFT party, who might ask him embarrassing questions about the torture policy of his administration:

Andere Politiker haben die Visite in den letzten Tagen genutzt, um sich möglichst weit von dem Präsidenten zu distanzieren. Der Tenor quer durch alle Parteien: Bushs Regierungszeit war ein Desaster. Den meisten Volksvertretern dürfte es daher ganz recht sein, den Texaner nicht mehr treffen zu müssen. (In the last few days other politicians have taken advantage of the visit to put as much distance as possible between themselves and the president.  The common thought that crosses all party lines: Bush's presidency was a disaster. Most of the representatives are only too glad that they won't have to meet with the Texan ever again.)

As far as I know, President Bush has not asked to meet with Murat Kurnaz from Bremen, so that he could apologize for detaining and torturing the young man in Guantanamo for five years, even though the US military knew he had no terrorist connections. As far as I know , President Bush has not asked to meet with Khalid el-Masri, a German citizen, to apologize for the "unfortunate mix-up" where US intelligence kidnapped him off the street and flew him to a Black Site in Afghanistan where he was tortured. As far as I know, President Bush does not intend to apologize to the German people for using the US air base at Ramstein as a CIA "Drehscheibe" (hub) for rendition flights.

Being George W. Bush means never having to say you're sorry.

Murat Kurnaz on US Public Radio

National Public Radio's call-in program Talk of the Nation had an interview with Murat Kurnaz about his new book Five Years of My Life: An Innocent Man in Guantanamo. Kurnaz was interviewed by telephone from a studio in Bremen, since he is not permitted to travel to the country that tortured him and held him captive for five years without charges. You can listen to the interview and read an excerpt from his book here.

Kurnaz did a reasonably good job in the interview, although at times he had difficulty with English.  Most of the callers were respectful, and some even apologized for the actions of their government.  But of course there were others who had a different perspective.  One caller stated he "didn't believe one word"  of Murat and his book.  The whole story was fabricated to slam the United States and its struggle against "Islamofascism".  Actually, the caller seemed to imply that Kurnaz was never really at Guantanamo at all!

You can read similar comments on the Talk of the Nation Blog. One commenter - Donna Largent - also rejects Kurnaz's story, and condemns NPR for being a mouthpiece of anti-American propaganda:

We are fighting a heinous war and the enemy is bloodthirsty and does all kinds of gross things like beheading with dull blades. Why is it that almost every time I turn my radio to your shows, you are knocking our wonderful country? If we are so bad, why don't you all at our indicting public radio organization find other places to live? I am tired of hearing you constantly slam the United States.

This is the typical response of the Authoritarian Right in the US when it is confronted with inconvenient facts: attack the patriotism of the messenger and insist that it is nothing but a conspiracy of lies.

UPDATE: In the radio interview and in his book Kurnaz mentions that he personally witnessed the deaths of detainees.  For this he is accused of lying, for the US does not kill prisoners - even if they are only "enemy combatants" and not subject to the protections of the Geneva Conventions (according to the Bush administration).  I would refer those doubters to this autopsy report by the Armed Forces Medical Examiner (pdf)  about an "Iraqi Detainee who died while in US custody" (as written in the report itself).  This detainee - as per the report - was hung by his wrists (like Kurnaz), gagged, and then brutally beaten.  All of his ribs were fractured.

An unfortunate aberration by a few bad apples? There are 108 of such autopsy reports - that we know of so far...

John McCain a Danger for Europe

John McCain has been busy speaking with European leaders to assure them that he will look to rebuild the transatlantic relationships that have been severely damaged in the Bush era.  No more "Old Europe" scorn and sarcasm.  No, McCain has been positively effusive in his praise of our European partners.  Last month he had only glowing compliments for Germany in his interview in Der Spiegel:

McCain: "Germany does play a very influential role around the world, and I value the relationship that we have shared for many, many generations. I believe Germany will continue to play a very influential and important role in the world."

Last week McCain visited London and Paris where he impressed his hosts with his commitment to action on climate change. He promised a new era of mulitlateralism, of commitment to the rule of law: he would shut down the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay and end the practice of torturing detainees at CIA "Black Sites" in Romania. He even praised NATO's actions in Afghanistan; no bashing the Europeans for avoiding the combat theater in southern Afghanistan.  Sure, there was the minor irritation of the Iraq War - which may continue "for the next 100 years", and which has destabilized the Middle East for many years to come - but reasonable people can disagree about this.  All of this was music to European ears: McCain would be a welcome change.

But not everyone buys this image of a softer, gentler McCain who would nurture America's relations with Europe.  Anatol Lieven, professor at Kings College in London, warned in the Financial Times, that Europe "should fear a McCain Presidency":

"Mr McCain’s promises, during last week’s visit to London, to listen more to America’s European allies, need to be taken with a giant pinch of salt. There is, in fact, no evidence that he would be prepared to alter any important US policy at Europe’s request.

Reflecting the neo-conservative programme of spreading democracy by force, Mr McCain declared in 2000: “I’d institute a policy that I call ‘rogue state rollback’. I would arm, train, equip, both from without and from within, forces that would eventually overthrow the governments and install free and democratically elected governments.” Mr McCain advocates attacking Iran if necessary in order to prevent it developing nuclear weapons, and last year was filmed singing “Bomb, bomb Iran” to the tune of the Beach Boys’ “Barbara Ann”."

Indeed, McCain's hatred of Russia and his strong commitment to the eastward expansion of NATO poses a specific risk to Germany.  Yesterday, in a major speech on foreign policy, McCain once again brought up his favorite idea of a League of Democracies, from which he explicitly excludes Russia. In fact, McCain would expel Russia from the Group of 8.  Lieven is concerned that McCain's approach could embroil Europe in a dangerous conflict with Russia:

"Mr McCain suffers from more than the usual degree of US establishment hatred of Russia, coupled with a particular degree of sympathy for Georgia and the restoration of Georgian rule over Abkhazia and South Ossetia. He advocates the expulsion of Russia from the Group of Eight leading industrialised nations and, like Mr Scheunemann, is a strong supporter of early Nato membership for Georgia and Ukraine. Mr Scheunemann has accused even Condoleezza Rice, secretary of state, of “appeasement” of Russia. Nato expansion exemplifies the potential of a McCain presidency. Apart from the threat of Russian reprisals, if the Georgians thought that in a war they could rely on US support, they might be tempted to start one. A McCain presidency would give them good reason to have faith in US support."

What we have in John McCain is a neo-conservative in sheep's clothing.  Obviously, Europe cannot influence the election in the US. But it should not welcome a McCain victory in November.

See also Der Spiegelfechter: The Manchurian Candidate