The debate

The media says it was a draw. But was it? The widely anticipated US presidential debate was, and to some extend that surprised me, rather interesting. Still, I’m not too sure whether or not it was a draw between Mr McCain and Mr Obama. From an American point of view, I suppose I could understand why one would say it was a draw. Both seemed to bring their point across quite well, Obama seemed more involved, but McCain more like a statesman. But I think from a European point of view, many have realised that McCain is actually a man with some not too unimportant opinions and solutions for the US. This was quite surprising for many people over here, as many people in Europe love Obama as much as creationists love God. I personally am not a McCain supporter, but I do think that he was able to show quite a few people in the Old World, that he has quite some good ideas. He also, as I said earlier, came across more like a statesman, and not as a candidate. His answers weren’t as short and pregnant as those of Obama, but on the other hand he was not standing there, shaking his hand and simply saying something like “this is not true,” whenever he felt treated wrongly. Instead, he was able to actually explain where Obama was wrong, which made him appear, to a certain extend, more competent.
Nevertheless, both seem a bit like the macher, and that certainly is what America needs. They had grand ideas and both wanted to break with all the meshuga politics of Mr Bush. Here, naturally, McCain had more problems convincing the audience than Senator Obama. I think, from a European point of view, McCain surprised with some sort of sharpness people did not expect him to have. Whereas Mr Obama was just like we expected him to be, remembering his words at the Siegessäule in Berlin. But, even though I just said a few positive things about McCain, somehow his Gordon Brownness, his old-fashioned slowliness, his awkward shiftlessness just annoyed me, especially towards the end of the debate… It was quite long after all – but still worth watching. Schreiber.

WHY WAS THERE NO JOINT STATEMENT?

A very important statements came from America today: Peaches Geldorf married her boyfriend, Max Drummy. And, let’s be honest, it was about time for them to get married - they have known each other already for nearly four weeks!
Okay, that was not quite the statement I was actually thinking of. Instead, I was thinking of statements made by US President George W Bush and his Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice. Both politicians demanded that Russia ends all military operations in Georgia, as they have promised to the EU Presidency (being represented by Nicolas Sarkozy at the moment). In an impressively direct and Russia-critical press conference that was broadcasted around the globe, Mrs. Rice warned Russia of consequences, but failed to name any.
Looking at Russia’s ongoing military intervention way beyond the actual zone of conflict (many journalists reported that Russia continues to bomb Gori, a city outside of South Ossetia), Mrs Rice said: "I have heard the Russian president say that his military operations are over. I am saying it is time for the Russian president to be true to his word." The Secretary also warned Russia, saying that “things have changed” since the end of the USSR.
Not knowing what the consequences for Russia could be, it is not quite clear yet, if they will lead to an end of the war.
Mr Bush gave an equally important press conference earlier today, saying: "The United States stands with the democratically elected government of Georgia and insists that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia be respected." Whatever one may think about the US-reactions to the crisis, one cannot but notice that these statements should have been made by a EU-European politician.
And yes, you may say, European politicians made similar statements. This is in fact true, but only on national levels. What worries me, however, is that the EU was (once again) unable to come up with a common policy for the crisis. At the beginning of the conflict I was rather confident that the EU would find a common South Ossetia policy, however, I was wrong (at least that's how it looks like at the moment).
It might have been the wrong decision to sent Mr Sarkozy to deal with the crisis and enforce some sort of ceasefire. Maybe it would have been better to send a EU politician and not an (after all) ‘national’ politician. But, to be honest, could Javier Solana (the de facto and to a certain extend also de jure EU Foreign Minister) have made a big difference? Would Russia be truer to its words, if the ceasefire would have been promised to Mr Solana instead of Mr Sarkozy? I am not too sure about it… I only know that it is truly shameful for the EU to not be able to find a common policy on this problem.
However, it is not too late yet. There is still time for statement of all EU members demanding that Russia stops its unlawful military intervention in Georgia immediately. The EU would also have to promise South Ossetia and Abkhazia that their self-determination as a state can be guaranteed by the Union.
Schreiber