People all over the world, join hands

People all over the world, join hands Start a love train, love train People all over the world, join hands Join a love train, love trainAll of your brothers over in Africa
Tell all the folks in Egypt and Israel too
Please don’t miss this train at the station
‘Cause if you miss it, I feel sorry, sorry for you

– Love Train, the O’Jays

via memeorandum the Associated Press reports (or maybe exults):

Excitement about Barack Obama emerged as a global phenomenon Wednesday as commentators and citizens around the world welcomed the news that he had sealed the Democratic presidential nomination.The excitement was less about Obama’s foreign policies — which remain vague on many fronts — than a sense that the candidacy of a black American with relatives in Africa and childhood friends in Asia marks a historic moment.

The article goes on to play up all the people around the world who herald Sen. Obama’s nomination as a sign of positive change.

One of the points that gets mentioned is that it’s nice to see a minority rise to such political prominence. Of course, to the best of my knowledge, none of the countries where people were interviewed has a member of a minority group ever risen to power. (The closest would be Germany, where the current chancellor, Angela Merkel comes from what used to be East Germany.)

Gina Cobb notes cynically:

Glad to see they’re keeping their perspective about the election.We wouldn’t want to see our media. Pushing. Voters. With. All. Their. Might. In. One. Particular. Direction!

The Washington Post ran a similar article.

Both articles cite the same response from Germany:

Obama also has strong support in Europe, the heartland of anti-Bush sentiment. “Germany is Obama country,” said Karsten Voight, the German government’s coordinator for German-North American cooperation. “He seems to strike a chord with average Germans,” who see him as a transformational figure like John F. Kennedy or Martin Luther King Jr.

(The Post article doesn’t credit AP, though it’s the exact same statement.)

It’s interesting though that the places where there are doubts are places where his policies or expected policies could change from America’s current policies.

Which is why Abe Greenwald at Contentions cautions (regarding the AP story):

When it comes to peace-and-love, beautiful sentences, and vague comparisons to adored icons, a handful of friends and family are jazzed up. That would be fine–if we were actually “waiting on the threshold of history.” But in reality, the world’s dangers and complications don’t pause so that everyone can stand around and admire the handsome man with the eloquent speeches, and in the dangers and complications department the world’s candidate has already clumsily placed himself behind the eight-ball.

For example:

In Iraq, views on Obama’s victory were mixed. Salah al-Obaidi, chief spokesman for Moqtada al-Sadr, the Shiite Muslim cleric who opposes the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq, said the Sadr movement favors having a Democrat in the White House on grounds that McCain would largely continue Bush’s policies.But in Samarra, a Sunni stronghold north of Baghdad, Omar Shakir, 58, a political analyst, said he hoped McCain would win the election and combat the influence of Shiite-dominated Iran.

So a spokesman for al-Sadr favors Obama but someone fighting Iranian influence doesn’t.

In Iran, government officials have taken no official position on the race. But “the majority of Iranians feel that the Democrats support what they want: a major and drastic change in relations with the U.S. So for them the coming of Obama would be a good omen,” said Davoud Hermidas Bavand, professor of U.S.-Iranian relations at Allameh Tabatabai University.

Now how does this professor know this? Perhaps a majority of Iranians want its government to change (or be changed) in order to improve relations with the U.S. But if that were true he wouldn’t dare say it, would he?

The Washington Post also reports that in Israel some are concerned about Sen. Obama as President. And the Palestinians?

Obama’s candidacy has generated suspicion among Palestinians as well. Ali Jarbawi, a political scientist at the West Bank’s Bir Zeit University, said that even if Obama appears to be evenhanded in his approach to the Middle East, he would never take on the pro-Israel lobby in Washington. “The minute that Obama takes office, if he takes office, all his aides in the White House will start working on his reelection,” Jarbawi said. “Do you think Obama would risk his reelection because of us?”

And that suspicion that a President Obama would be in thrall to the Jewish lobby was only increased by the candidate’s appearance before AIPAC yesterday.

Now Hamas retracts its endorsement (via memeorandum)

“Obama’s comments have confirmed that there will be no change in the U.S. administration’s foreign policy on the Arab-Israeli conflict,” Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters in Gaza.

“The Democratic and Republican parties support totally the Israeli occupation at the expense of the interests and rights of Arabs and Palestinians,” he said.

“Hamas does not differentiate between the two presidential candidates, Obama and Mccain, because their policies regarding the Arab-Israel conflict are the same and are hostile to us, therefore we do have no preference and are not wishing for either of them to win,” Zuhri said.

Hot Air notes that Sen. Obama’s been pretty public in his support of Israel since he’s become a candidate for President.

That’s one mighty thorough unendorsement, which is curious given that they only “endorsed” him in the first place six weeks ago, after he’d spent the past year telling anyone who’d listen how much he loves Israel. Did they somehow miss the previous thousand pro-Zionist speeches? Or were they finally convinced that he’s saying this stuff because he means it and not for political advantage by his big speech today to … the most politically influential Israeli lobbyist group in America? Doesn’t add up; I guess we’ll just have to wonder what the motive could be. Let’s hope that the news doesn’t dissuade his Palestinian-American supporters, many of whom have it in their heads that his true beliefs on this subject are rather more nuanced than his rhetoric indicates.

(Daled Amos has more on that “nuance“)

And it’s not just the extremists of Hamas who are upset, so too is the “moderate” Mahmoud Abbas.

“The whole world knows that holy Jerusalem was occupied in 1967 and we will not accept a Palestinian state without having Jerusalem as the capital of a Palestinian state.” said Abbas.

Unfortunately, the world isn’t aware that in 1948 what is called the West Bank was occupied by Jordan. The Jews of the Old City of Jerusalem were expelled in violation of the cease fire agreement and the Jews of the Etzion Bloc who survived the battle were slaughtered after surrendering.

Still most of the world seems happy, not least the media.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.