|
RRI newsletter subcription
(e-mail address):
|
 |
Archives:
|
|
| AN OVERVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL POLITICS IN 2008 |
| (2008-12-30) |
| Last updated: 2009-01-09 16:30 EET |
The first signs appeared when the mortgage market collapsed in the US, with a terrible impact on stock markets and financial institutions. Towards the end of the year, the largest western economies officially went into recession. The Bush Administration decided to take over assets from the most important banks, in an unprecedented measure, which some described as nationalization, but which was also described, somewhat paradoxically, as a measure to salvage the market economy. America’s three leading car makers were among the first victims of the recession. They said they had a drastic drop in demand, and asked for government assistance to keep afloat. The US, the EU, and the large Asian economies have already pumped billions into containing the economic crisis, which is only beginning. The IMF and the World Bank have warned that the world economy could continue its downslide in 2009, and any signs of recovery would not be seen until the end of next year or in early 2010.
November 2008 marks the beginning of the Obama era in the US, after he won the presidentials in a landslide. His unexpected success, according to commentators, is due to his personal qualities and his political marketing. The crisis had an important part to play as well, while the blunders of the Bush administration were no hindrance either, as they were severely punished by young voters. Here is Magdalena Boiangiu, foreign politics commentator for the weekly Dilema Veche:
“I believe that the fear of the economic crisis and its effects had a catalysing role, because everything hit when Obama had already defeated Hillary Clinton in the running for the Democratic nomination. Of course, Obama was favoured by the lack of reaction from his opponent, McCain. I think Obama’s success comes mostly thanks to a change of generation. The majority now in America is made up of people who have grown up under the two Bushes, who have had enough of this kind of governance, and Obama’s skilful promises have somewhat rekindled their hope. It remains to be seen how much of this hope will be manifested in reality.”
In February, Kosovo, then a province in Serbia with an Albanian majority, unilaterally proclaimed its independence after international negotiations on its status broke down. Recognized by the US and most other western countries, the new entity does have legitimacy issues, and completely lacks independence in economic and security matters, which questions its very statehood. Here is Magdalena Boiangiu again:
“It is an open question, if I may say so, because we are dealing with a vicious circle; because Kosovo does not have complete legitimacy, economic life cannot develop, and the state is unable to prove self-sufficient. As we can see, the after-effects of the violence in the Balkans are going away very slowly, and the ones that initiated it should bear full responsibility. The Yugoslav federation broke down, and continues to break down into smaller and smaller splinter, confetti states. It is an alienation reflex, a reflex of mutual hate, and normalcy is hard to regain. “
Predictably, Russia reacted strongly to Kosovo’s declaration of independence, and warned that it may reconsider its position towards separatism in the former Soviet space. In August, one of the many so-called frozen conflicts cracked open in South Ossetia, with Georgia’s attempt to take control over the region. This attempt elicited a strong and disproportionate reaction from Moscow, which invaded Georgia. This fuelled suspicions that the hurried intervention by the Saakashvili government was provoked by Russia, which used it to have an alibi for its aggression against a sovereign state that made the mistake of openly declaring its pro-Western position. The conflict was unavoidable, in Magdalena Boiangiu’s opinion:
“In that region, both parties were incessantly provoking each other. All the time, there were patrols that allegedly got lost across the border, or recon drones that flew in places they had no business going to. You may recall that there were incidents occurring all the time, which eventually blew up into this incident, in which Georgia lost. Let’s call a spade a spade. It is highly unlikely that Georgia would get its territory back in the predictable future. Ossetia and Abkhazia are lost.”
Magdalena Boiangiu also believes that what Russia used to find highly irritating, namely Georgia’s prospective NATO accession, is now virtually out of the question:
“Chances are small, in my opinion, for several reasons, including the fact that NATO will be less able and less willing to integrate anyone at this point. It has reached its limits, and has overshot its mandate to a certain extent, and the alliance has to be redesigned before expanding further. This is all the more so in the case of countries with such a complex and conflicting history. However, Georgia’s hope will be kept alive, if not of joining NATO, then at least of getting western support, because Russia’s extremely intolerant and aggressive stance cannot be left unchallenged”.
|
|
| |
WMA |
|
64kbps : |
1
2
3
|
|
|
128kbps : |
1
2
3
|
| |
MP3 |
|
|
64kbps : |
1
2
3
|
|
|
128kbps : |
1
2
3
|
| |
AAC+ |
|
|
48kbps : |
1
2
3
|
|
|
64kbps : |
1
2
3
|
 Historical mascot of
RRI |
2025-04-03
Print
Listen again