Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

The Cairo effect? For a moment, forget about the political back-and-forth over the stimulus, the latest drama surrounding Sarah Palin, the Supreme Court’s stay of Chrysler’s sale to Fiat, or today’s Democratic gubernatorial primary in Virginia. The most important political event over the past couple of days may very well have been Sunday’s parliamentary elections in Lebanon, where the American-backed coalition bested Hezbollah’s coalition. As the New York Times front-pages today, analysts are attributing the upset results, in part, to President Obama’s big Cairo speech last week. “It is hard to draw firm conclusions from one election. But for the first time in a long time, being aligned with the United States did not lead to defeat in the Middle East,” the paper says. The biggest test, however, comes on Friday, when Iran’s Ahmadinejad is running for re-election against a much more moderate candidate, Mir-Hossein Moussavi. “I think the speech of Obama in Cairo more likely played a role in neutralizing anti-Americanism,” Khalil al-Dakhil, a sociologist from Saudi Arabia told the Times. “It was a positive message. It was a conciliatory message.” Is a trend occurring in the Middle East? We’ll find out later this week.

The winners celebrated in the streets, setting off fireworks and driving around in motorcades honking hours before the official results from Sunday's parliamentary vote were even announced.

The election was the first major political test in the Middle East since President Obama called last week for a "new beginning between the United States and Muslims." In his speech from Cairo, he challenged the Islamic world to confront violent extremism and urged Israel, the Palestinians and Arab states to find common ground to establish peace.

Hezbollah, which the U.S. considers a terrorist organization, has been one of the staunchest opponents of American policy in the Middle East. A win for the Shiite group would have boosted the influence of its backers Iran and Syria and risked pushing one of the region's most unsettled countries into international isolation and possibly more conflict with Israel.

But Obama's outreach did not appear to have resonated with the electorate as much as a last-minute appeal from head of the influential Maronite Catholic Church. Cardinal Nasrallah Sfeir warned voters on the eve of the election of what he called an attempt to change Lebanon's character and its Arab identity, a clear reference to Hezbollah and its Persian backer, Iran.

Ivytalk wrote:Both Obama and Biden gave the moderates and their supporters the necessary political cover to come out ahead. Good result!

Gil Dobie wrote:I agree, Obama's speech was great, but I think it was more to do with Biden's threat to withdraw economic aid. Money talks

NY Times LInk

When Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. visited Lebanon in late May, and appeared to threaten withdrawal of financial aid if the opposition won, that was widely derided as a kiss of death. But now, some political analysts believe the vice president may have helped by crystallizing for voters their choice: alliance with the United States, France and the regional allies, Egypt and Saudi Arabia; or with Iran and Syria and their allies, Hezbollah and Hamas.

The fear was that Lebanon might have become isolated like the Gaza Strip.

Ivytalk wrote:
"JOE BIDEN?? AH, FOKK!!"

Grizalltheway wrote:

Ivytalk wrote:Both Obama and Biden gave the moderates and their supporters the necessary political cover to come out ahead. Good result!

This is what happens when intelligent people occupy the White House.

AZGrizFan wrote:

Grizalltheway wrote:
This is what happens when intelligent people occupy the White House.

I'm tired of "intelligent people" saying we need to keep apologizing.