Israel:

And does Obama score brownie points with having Biden as his running mate with the Jewish voters? Following are some reactions from Israel.

Naked Israeli's Weblog is stoked.

I am totally stoked that Obama’s Vice President is Senator Joseph Biden…Biden has been a good friend to Israel and the Soviet Jewry movement. That should quell the Jewish critics of Obama. He is not perfect on abortion but okay. He did establish the 1994 Violence Against Women Act.

Patriot Missive, from Israel, links to an interview with Shalom TV in which Biden confesses that he is a Zionist. She notes:

Obama’s choice in a veep is more calculating than I suspected. Does this mean they actually have a chance with the Jewish vote?
Don’t count on it

In another post, Ms Missive says it is only a matter of time before Biden grabs the headlines with scandals of his own.

I’m guessing it’ll be less than 48 hours before scandals or scrutinies (real or imaginary) of Democratic Vice Presidential candidate Biden are jammed into our faces.

Among them are:

Military service record: At the height of the Vietnam war in 1968, Biden was prime for the draft at 26 years old but was rejected for “medical reasons“. I’m sure details of his rejection will become clearer in the following weeks. It should be noted that his son, Beau Biden, has orders to deploy to Iraq on October 3rd, 2008 with his Delaware National Guard JAG unit. Will his son bring a balance for the senior Biden’s lack of military record?
Biden supported the Bush Administration post 9/11and voted in favor of the Iraq invasion. Flip-flopping. Our favorite campaign hyphenation.
In 1988, Bidden was caught plagiarizing several lines from the speech of Neil Kinnock, then British Labor party leader.

And still in Israel, Simply Jews warns:

Joe Biden, Beau Biden, Jill Biden, Ashley Biden, …
Now watch the tabloids. It has started…

Iran:

Meanwhile, Iranian Omid Memarian, who lives in the US, says Biden's Foreign Policy experience speaks for itself as being different from McCain's.

Finally Barack Obama, announced his VP last night, a man who is well known mostly for his credentials in foreign policy. Although, Senator McCain and Senator Biden, both embrace a long time involvement in FP issues, they do have separate and fundamentally different styles.

Turkey:

Turkey Talk agrees that Biden has been selected thanks to his massive foreign policy experience. The blogger, who voices his concern about Biden's stance towards Turkey and the Armenian genocide, adds:

Delaware Senator Joe Biden will be Barack Obama's running mate. That's all we need, another senator. No Governors (the Executive Branch remember???) yet…
For the first time in a long time, both of the presidential candidates are senators.

Among Turkey Talk's other concerns are:

… but Biden comes across as an arrogant SOB whenever I've seen him chair his committee and ask questions of witnesses whose very presence he dislikes, obviously always playing to the cameras . . . he's not someone who takes a back seat very easily . . . and he may overshadow the ticket . . .

Cuba:

Writing at the Review of Cuban-American Blog, Manuel A. Tellechea is at a loss as to why Biden was selected. He writes:

It would have made no sense for Barack Obama to pick an even bigger political lightweight as his vice presidential running mate (if such a creature could be found). Joe Biden has been in the senate since Barack Obama was 11 years old. His 36 years of experience there dwarfs Obama's 3. To say that this ticket is the most lopsided in American history is to put it mildly. If Biden had been the nominee it is doubtful that he would have picked Obama as his vice president. No Democratic senator except Hillary Clinton has been as vociferous in pointing out Obama's lack of qualifications for the presidency. Even when Biden tried to say something nice about the junior senator from Illinois, this is the best that he could manage: “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that’s a storybook man.”

Telechea further describes Biden as a ‘loose cannon':

He is the Democratic Party's biggest loose cannon and seems congenitally incapable of opening his mouth without demeaning himself or his party. Even more than Obama, Biden is in love with his own words. But, unlike Obama, he doesn't need to have words spoonfed to him by a teleprompter. He is as naturally loquacious as Obama is inarticulate. Speaking gibberish has served Obama in good stead by concealing his very real vacuousness. The last thing that Obama needs is for someone like Biden to set lyrics to his tune.

Croatia:

Croatian Bojan, who lives in Canada also wonders what Biden brings to the table. He writes:

So far, I have refrained from commenting on the foolishness that is the American presidential primary season, but I see that Obama (who I liked) has picked himself an old white guy for a running mate. Way to usher in the age of change and hope.

India:

Indian Sunny, writing at Pickled Politics, says Biden is a good choice for Obama. He explains:

Biden will be a good attack-dog, he has strong foreign-policy credentials, and he’s a strong Democrat. He’s also older and a Catholic which, according to Michael Tomasky, will help with those constituencies. Who am I to disagree?

Thailand:

From Thailand, Jotman is happy with the nomination. He writes:

In my estimation, Barack Obama could not have picked a better running mate in his bid for the American presidency.

Here are three I guarantee will come out of the gates early:

Military service record: At the height of the Vietnam war in 1968, Biden was prime for the draft at 26 years old but was rejected for “medical reasons“. I’m sure details of his rejection will become clearer in the following weeks. It should be noted that his son, Beau Biden, has orders to deploy to Iraq on October 3rd, 2008 with his Delaware National Guard JAG unit. Will his son bring a balance for the senior Biden’s lack of military record?
Biden supported the Bush Administration post 9/11and voted in favor of the Iraq invasion. Flip-flopping. Our favorite campaign hyphenation.
In 1988, Bidden was caught plagiarizing several lines from the speech of Neil Kinnock, then British Labor party leader.
Got another one? Let me know…..

To solve this ethnic problem, Georgia decided to unite the two separated parts of South and North Ossetia, but region was never part of post-Soviet Georgia.

As long as Georgia was a part of the Soviet Union, all ethnic conflicts within the Soviet zone of “interests”, were not international issues. Yet, the issue emerged à la une after the dissolution of the USSR, when first in 1995 the two regions — Abkhazia and South Ossetia — became involved in conflicts with local separatists supported by Moscow. The issue ended in a de facto independence of South Ossetia from Georgia.

Yet, with a pro-US president in office, Georgia launched an assault earlier this month with artillery and rocket attacks on the separatists. Russia immediately reacted and showed the sharp claws of a polar bear. A much larger Russian army quickly crushed the Georgian assault. It is believed that the United States knew or even encouraged the Georgian attack. With the support of the US, Georgia hoped to annex the region.

If this conflict is to be resolved, only an international institution like the UN must intervene, not the US or NATO.

The US should now stay away from a new regional conflict, which is thousands of kilometers away from Washington. Because of its bad reputation in Iraq, stirring up internal problems in other countries, and its hunger for national resources of other countries, the Bush Administration does not have any lesson to teach to this part of the world with a totally different history and socio-economic background. Furthermore, there is nothing like “weapons of mass destruction” in this area.

In actuality, it is time to solve international problems through firm and reliable UN resolutions, rather than the bogus actions of world super-powers. It is obvious that the US, being the only power today with hegemonic desires, could generate further tension. The world is not going to sit and watch those self-baptised Yankee liberators in the Bush Administration try to impose their long outdated principles of “democracy” and “freedom”.

The world has not forgotten that in 1961 the US and USSR came to the brink of nuclear war when the USSR was determined to set up atomic missiles in the US’ backyard in Cuba. The Soviet move was in retaliation against US basing nuclear missiles in Turkey. Now we have the US — via NATO — again trying to further its military alliance in the Caucasuses.

It is not unreasonable to expect that Russia, rather than allowing events to continue down that road again, would act swiftly in self defence — probably in the same way the US would react. I wonder what the Russians would do if a similar thing happened in their backyard. While they are still a major powerful and have the legacy of once being the strongest military superpower, they would say and do almost anything and get away with it.

There is no evidence that Russia intends to occupy Georgia, overthrow its government and install a puppet government. The Western media has not been reporting properly and honestly about the issue, rather they are exaggerating the conflict just like during the Cold War. Georgia is not Poland of 1939-40, divided by a German-Soviet pact, nor have we the same monsters like Hitler and Stalin in the East and West.

There is a much stronger ground for Germany and France, with their relatively better tradition of democracy and a lesser ambition of hegemony, to act as intermediaries to help bring about a ceasefire and reduce tensions until both sides with the help of the UN can achieve the best resolution. Despite failure to form a united stance on how to respond to Russia’s military action in South Ossetia, Germany and France, because of their close relations with Russia, can play an important role to impede further escalation of violence.

I do not have to guess that the West and the U.S are taking that threat seriously because if it happens and the Russians are putting for sure this as possible scenario,there will be a WWIII again in the world.

G.W Bush is leaving one hell of burden , it is not only Iraq or Iran ,no it is Russia now, the angry powerful Russia.

The Ultimate question is where we stand from all this and why we are taking this stand.

More to read

• Polish town back in centre of nuclear standoff

The Soviet Union was once a mighty empire, controlling large chunks of land in Europe and Asia, and giving the West a mighty enemy. Then it all fell apart; the individual states (many of them incorporated by force) wanted their freedom, and Boris Yeltsin wanted his own Russia to rule, and so the Soviet empire ended. Then began the decline. Then rose a strongman out of all this, one who had the blood of the all-powerful intelligence agency KGB running through him. On his own he could not do anything; however, he was lucky. Russia had large tracts of oil and gas, and had turned into a large exporter of these, bringing in revenue, and helping regrow the power.

However, in the midst of all this, the world did not stay still. Many of the former Soviet republics did not stay still, moving towards the West (and seemingly away from the clutches of their former all-powerful dictatorial landlord), striking closer relationships with them. At the same time, like any major power (and one that remembers all too well how powerful it is), Russia grew increasingly resentful of this emergence of the West in an area that it treats as its backyard (a close equivalent would be if Mexico suddenly became more hostile to the US and very very friendly towards Russia or China).

This may well seem normal for a powerful country to treat its immediate neighbors as its areas of influence, but not so for the country so dominated. Ask Finland, that has fought wars with Russia in the past over this dominance, and ask Afghanistan that does not like being called as an area of Pakistani influence, as if it has no identity of its own.

So, when Ukraine tried to show itself as more hostile towards Russia, there was a sudden crippling blockade of the oil and gas it gets from Russia; and now Georgia. Ever since President Mikheil Saakashvili came to office and had a campaign of getting back the pro-Russian provinces of South Ossetia and a second separatist area, Abkhazia, Russia has been seething. It already knows that it is much more powerful. The US wants its support in the initiatives against Iran and North Korea, and cannot afford to antagonize Russia. And the Georgian leader gave Vladimir Putin just that chance. He tried to take one of the provinces, South Ossetia back, and met such overwhelming Russian force (without any check by any other party) that Western leaders were worried that Putin may be trying to gain more geographic control inside Georgia.

Right now, things are moving towards a cease-fire, but Russia must have intended this as a show of force to Georgia and others, that they are truly helpless when faced with this great bear.

Obama visited Yad Vashem, gave a speech in Sderot and stopped to place a personal note in the Wailing Wall. Yair Raveh elaborates on the latter event, and describes the blunt violation of privacy by journalists who published Obama's personal wish:

Yesterday before he took off to Germany he visited The Wailing Wall in Jerusalem, the only remaining relic of the ancient Temple of David, and the most sacred spot for Jews. As customary, he placed a note in the cracks of the stones. It is believed that a wish or a prayer stuffed in the cracks gets fulfilled by God. Obama, in what seems like a last minute improvisation, wrote a small prayer on his hotel stationary (nice product placement). Journalists then promptly stormed the wall and ransacked his note and had it reprinted in “Maariv” (it’s a big faux-pas from a Jewish traditional point of view and I’m quite certain that if Obama were Jewish no mainstream reporter would’ve dared violate his privacy so bluntly).

But, although this whole thing - the note, the reprint - might’ve been staged it made me like Obama all the more. Not only for his respect for tradition but also for his great handwriting and his touching prayer: “Lord - Protect my family and me. Forgive me my sins, and help me guard against pride and despair. Give me the wisdom to do what is right and just. And make me an instrument of your will.”

Several threads continue to discuss this topic. A good one can be foundhere: The Kotel's Rabbi sends his apologies to the Democratic candidate.

In his visit to Sderot Obama expressed deep empathy towards Sderot's residents whose lives are overshadowed by the constant threat of qassam missiles. “The first job of any nation state is to protect its citizens. And so I can assure you that if — I don't even care if I was a politician. If somebody was sending rockets into my house where my two daughters sleep at night, I'm going to do everything in my power to stop that.”, claimed Obama. “And I would expect Israelis to do the same thing”.

Below, a picture from Obama's speech in Sderot. Notice behind him, the mound of Qassam missiles.

The Jerusalem Centre for Public Affairs emphasizes the importance of highlighting the central reason behind the continuing turmoil in the Middle East when meeting Obama:

The biggest challenge facing Israel is to persuade American factors, including Obama, that the Israeli-Palestinian problem is an outcome of an Iranian threat and its extensions - Hamas and Hezbollah - but not the central cause behind the turmoil in the Middle East.

The question if and how Obama will be affected in his visit is connected to the problem that the Israeli cabinet has many opinions: Olmert claims that Israel has never been this close to reaching an agreement with the Palestinians - an agreement that includes a promise to give back at least 90% of the West Bank… In his meeting with the opposition leader, Binyamin Netanyahu, Obama will hear the necessity of having defensible borders and a united Jerusalem.

One thing is clear - Israel must not isolate the Iranian threat as solely a nuclear-ballistic threat. It is necessary for the State of Israel to illustrate the threats on its borders from Hezbollah in the north to Hamas in the south, and the central threat of the short range missiles. These make it necessary for Israel to maintain an area in the West Bank in order to keep the threat away from the big cities, and in order to hinder the activities of Iranian agents like the Islamic Jihad and the El-Aqsa Brigades, who are present in the West Bank and are prevented from carrying out attacks because of Israel Defence Forces presence.

It is clear to everyone that Obama is after votes from the American Jew population. Assaf Carmel mentions a clip that has recently been shot for the Internet in which a number of prominent Israelis express their faith in the commitment to Israel of presumptive U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama. Among the public figures to appear on the clip, which is to air in three weeks, are former Israeli Defense Forces chief of staff Amnon Lipkin-Shahak, former MKs Roman Bronfman and Naomi Hazan, Haaretz publisher Amos Schocken and the actor Moshe Ivgi. The clip, a creation of Alma Harel - an Israeli living in Los Angeles - is yet to be released.

In his post, Omer Carmon contemplates reasons for Obama's lack of support by the American Jews:

Amos Shoken turns to American Jews: “I believe in Obama's commitment towards the security of Israel. We do not need another George Bush in the White House”. In addition, Amnon Lipkin-Shahak, Roman Bronfman, Naomi Haza and the actor Moshe Ivgy have all endorsed the Democratic nominee.

But American Jews are worried.

Barack Obama's situation within the American Jew community is far from simple. The majority of Jews in the US who previously voted for the Democratic party, are still worried from the fact that his father's Muslim connections affecting his stance towards the Palestinians and dialogue with Iran.

What must Obama do in order to gain these votes? Danny Blushtein describes his notion of how the candidates must “win over” the Jewish American votes by aligning their viewpoints to that of the Israeli Right-wing Likud party:

I read today that “a series of charicatures in the Arab media is presenting the two American candidates as puppets controlled by Israel and the American Jews”. These Charicatures were described by the league against slander as “antisematic”.

To the best of my knowledge, saying the truth is not “slander”, and a truthful statement cannot be claimed as “antisematic”. I do not know if Barack Obama or John McCain are in the Israeli or the American Jew's pocket, however I do know clearly that they are both doing everything they can to make this impression.

Obama with his “Jerusalem united” statement, and McCain with similar statements, do not sound like balanced global leaders, but as candidates to lead the Likud party. My impression is that in order to win the elections in the US it is necessary to be backed by the Jewish community, and in order to win those votes, it is necessary to align with Likud's dogma.

And on a final and more personal note, Itay Engel describes his optimistic prospects for better global relationships if Obama is chosen:

I often visit countries like Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq and Lebanon for my work using my American passport, so that my Israeli identity is not exposed. In the past seven years I have learned that as an “American”, more and more doors are closing for me. In Africa as well as Latin America, people don't hide their “anti” when I present this passport, and this reaches its peak in Europe. The European disgust with US foreign policy and the fear from the American perception of the world has affected the way US citizens are looked upon.

And here comes Obama, a man whose views and interpretations of world issues are similar to theirs (EU). How is it possible that such a man, who is also black, with roots in Africa and links to Muslim heritage, carries away this same nation that has been categorized as racist, dark and lacking any future hope?

If this is true, all the definitions and categorizations on the Americans as they were frustratingly set by my friend Ihsan from Najaf (Iraq) along with other friends from Afghanistan, Congo, Argentina and the UK, will have to be reworded. If Obama is elected, people around the world will give the United States and its citizens a new opportunity. This means a real change in the relationship between the US and the rest of the world.

* This post also appears in Global Voices Online.