It was in the New York Times: It is necessary for a new Israeli approach in Gaza, say American authorities. This news refers to the Israeli attack on vehicles that brought humanitarian aid to Gaza. It is a good sign that the Obama administration is talking about a new approach. Perhaps the new approach should be applied to all of America’s external politics administrated by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
When elected, Obama turned to the Islamic world and promised a new vision for the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, but Hillary is still applying the same old politics that do not produce any results.
In the same context, the agreement that Brazil and Turkey made with Iran was very positive. Not that the agreement is some kind of a wonderful step, but it is an advance. President Lula of Brazil was right to insist on the amplification of an open dialogue between powerful authorities and fundamentalists. Obviously, it is necessary to have a limit and apply a little pressure to open politics rather than resort to radicalization. From a determined point of view, there is always the option to apply more severe political actions, too, if necessary.
Lula must pressure Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to free political prisoners and to end the repression of political opponents in Iran. Also, Brazil must insist on the end of Palestinian terrorist acts and the increase of communication. The pressure tactic will only result in greater radicalization. Israel and the U.S. should also give their efforts.
Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize because he was willing to fight against radicals. But he has slowly migrated towards a more conservative position, which could all be a tactic to become reelected in 2012 and again be the real Barack Obama.
Until then, Hugo Chavez is right in saying that there are two Obamas.
It is hoped that the Obama willing to give up on both the war strategy against terror and also on zero result politics will indeed prevail. Wouldn’t it be great news to the world to see the return of that democratic candidate who once protected new approaches to old problems?