Tainted by association

By Gamil Mattar

What makes the coming weeks particularly important is not only the fact that Clinton will not be running for office, but also the likelihood that the two remaining years of his second term of office will considerably hamper the chances of the Democratic Party to improve their representational presence in the legislature and in the state gubernatorial elections. Indeed, Clinton's remaining time in office may jeopardise the Democrats' chances of holding on to the presidency itself.

Others, though, believe that the state of the American economy will alone determine the results of November's elections. One public opinion poll after the other has confirmed that Clinton's popularity has not declined to such an extent that it threatens the chances of the Democratic Party in the legislative elections or in the next presidential contest.

Against this backdrop, a number of projections appear significant. The first is that the US economy will continue to grow at its current rate. In other words, the US will remain immune from the economic crises afflicting the international economy. Indeed, it may well benefit from such crises, as large US corporations rush to buy up the assets of Asia's reeling banking and industrial institutions.

The immunity of the US economy to international fluctuations is unlikely to be affected by Clinton's continuation to the end of his term. This, at least, is what is contended by those who advocate the need for change before it is too late. The only importance of this possibility, they hold, is that it will guarantee a relatively high -- if gradually diminishing -- popularity for President Clinton. However, the decision to allow Clinton to remain in office, this time, will not rest with the American people. Nor, according to the advocates of change, should it. The consequences are too important to be left to public opinion, since, it is contended, they involve the "peace and safety" of the American political system.

There have been certain indications that America's political elite believes that the American people are incapable of assessing the potential dangers posed by Clinton's behaviour in private life. They have noticed -- as have we, with some surprise -- that the majority of the American public has only grown more determined to overlook all Clinton's personal shortcomings. According to prominent American writers, Clinton's excesses have indeed begun to affect sensitive areas of the American political system. The American public, they say, is unaware of the extent of this effect, nor can it be, because these areas are highly complex and intricately bound together. In other words, some members of the American political elite believe that, if matters were left to American public opinion at this point, Clinton would remain in office until the last day of his term. The most likely prospect, however, is that, after reaching its pinnacle, Clinton's popularity will decline gradually, rendering it increasingly difficult for the Democrats to usher in Al Gore as the next democratic president, since Gore himself will be tainted by the scandals that have occurred or that may yet be exposed.

The Democratic Party may also have to distance itself from Clinton's center line and shift towards the left in order to placate the labour unions, which have become increasingly active. This is an option being considered in many European countries, notably the UK and Germany, and it appears to be imposing itself upon US decision makers. At the same time, it bears many risks in light of the growing extremism of the American right, which has begun to adopt ideologies and methods unprecedented in US political history.

On the other hand, many Republicans and a certain number of democrats have begun to portray Clinton as something of a "lame duck". This has been manifested by Congress's recent refusal to grant him the right to speed up the development of US economic relations with South America, as well as the foreign policy legislation imposing a blockade on the countries dealing with Iran and forcing US domination onto the UN and the IMF. The most damning proof, however, is the added influence the Congress has acquired in formulating policy. Thanks to this influence, an increasing number of pressure groups have come to exercise disproportionate authority in US policy, particularly foreign policy. It has now become obvious that the influence of Eastern European and Jewish ethnic and religious lobbies has far exceeded all recognised norms in the US political system, upsetting the precarious balance upon which this system is based. Several developments have contributed to this trend, but the prime cause is the growing weakness of the administration and the increasingly tangible gulf between it and the Congress.

President Clinton will not give in easily to pressure to resign from office. Such pressure will begin to increase upon his return from China, at which point he will be faced with a confrontation which, I hear, is being very carefully staged. One participant in this confrontation will be independent counsel Kenneth Starr. And I believe many other parties will collaborate to disclose new surprises in an attempt to sway the sympathies of the American public. I would not be surprise if certain files that have remained closed for reasons pertaining to US national security are opened. Already, too, there have been several attempts to enable the American Jewish lobby to lend a hand in preparing the groundwork for effecting a change at the summit of the political system.

A careful reading of developments in Washington leads me to favour the view that Al Gore and his supporters, the main forces in the Democratic Party and the representatives of US economic and security interests, could jettison Clinton before next November, and that the search is underway for a formula that will not further injure America's reputation and international status, or offend public opinion in a manner that would indirectly hamper Gore's chances. In all events, many in Washington admit frankly that Gore's chances as a presidential candidate are better if he runs as an incumbent who has replaced Clinton rather than a vice-president with a very limited mandate, whose reputation has been undermined by association.