Cyberspace has done the wonderful thing of making the world a local cyber-neighborhood, where conversations of all origins and topics occur and many of us have learned to care more often about what goes on beyond our borders.
On December of 2007 I wrote my first political post here at MariaNYC.com, moved by an unfortunate trifecta of bad news for women in politics around the world. Since I lost that article due to computer malfunctions, here and in cyberspace, I will summarize it by saying that in that sad December 27th of 2007 three things had occurred, which made me lose hope in humanity and the future of women in leading roles.
- The media’s constant beating and negative portrayal of Hillary Clinton, as she was running her primary against all the other democratic contenders at the time. And even in my beloved CNN, the portrayal was mainly negative. It bothered me because here was the first woman getting this far in a key presidential contest, and was fighting –what I sensed at a womanly level to be–common subconscious sexism.
- Added to that was the recent publication at the time, of photos showing one of my favorite all-time former presidential contenders at the international level, who during her brave campaign in Colombia, had been ruthlessly captured by the FARC, still in captivity 6 years later, looking sad and emaciated. It broke my heart to see Ingrid Betancourt, such a dynamic, progressive woman, reduced by nameless, worthless excuses for human beings, to just bones, skin and no spirit.
- The drop that spilled the cup in my despondence was the news that the phenomenal Benazir Bhutto had shamelessly been assassinated in Pakistan.
I remember the title of that first post being, “What the Hell is Going On?”. I questioned at the time the humanity subconscious in trying to suppress these up and coming female leaders in a contentious world stage. Of course I ended my article also pointing at the flickering light of hope that existed in knowing that Angela Merkel in Germany,
Ellen Johnson Sirleaf in Liberia, Michelle Bachelet in Chile and Cristina Fernández de Kirchner in Argentina were proof that it was worth holding on to hope that there will be a better balance of women and men in power in global politics. Yet, I have to face the fact that the balance is by far still yet to be achieved.
I was a bit slow coming around to supporting then candidate Obama, at the time fresh out of a bloody primary. As a Hillary supporter I ended up weighing my options and concluding that –despite the feminine presence at the bottom of the Republican ticket–there was no other way than to support the Democrat ticket on the final round of the election. And it was a worthwhile choice. Even though my initial choice for candidate did not win the primaries, watching Mr. Obama, as President, work hard at keeping his promises and not losing his common touch with those who put him in office, I’ve become a huge admirer of his. Listening to his speeches and watching the reaction of people, my own among those, has helped me overcome my initial despondence about the events of December 2007 and have hope for a more balanced mindset in world leadership. God knows how much we need it.
Dr. Deepak Chopra talked about this need for balance of power in the world stage with Larry King, a couple of weekends ago. He said that men have been in power too long –as a result we have seen wars and the avarice and aggressive gambling that went on to cause the economy to falter. He said that it is time that women take leading roles too, because women tend to look for consensus, as compared to the aggressivity of many male leaders who tend to gamble what they have, have an aggressive and competitive stance and tend to push their agenda on others, shunning the spirit of cooperation on behalf of world peace for their own advancement and reputation. And I agree with him! But I don’t think it is necessarily about our physical gender differences as much as it is about our mental attitudes, which unfortunately tend to be associated with male or female mindsets. Of course, in general it tends to be that way, but there are many exceptions to that rule. Sarah Palin is a perfect example of that exception. If she ever made it to the world stage as a leader, God help us! So, being a woman is not necessarily a guarantee that you’ll be a consensus maker. But in general, it tends to be the case, just like it tends to be true of many older and wiser men.
Although Hillary didn’t make it to the White House, Mr. Obama has proven to be the kind of leader Dr. Chopra said the world needs right now.
Obama may not be a female leader, but in all the “man” he is, he’s not on testosterone overload. He’s not a warmonger, nor the cowboy “my-way-or-the-highway” type. He is more sophisticated than that and he’s serious about world peace. I love his mindset, and his gender doesn’t seem to define his attitudes, for the most part. We needed someone like that to change the tone of the prior testosterone-overloaded macho administration that has caused so much damage in the cause of world peace. Obama is a great representation of this new type of leader. So having someone like him in power put me at ease that we wouldn’t be entering the world stage again with our fists up, ready for another fight. I truly saw the shift in the feedback from the leaders of countries that have normally been anti-US. After Mr. Obama’s election win, comments from the likes of Chavez, Cuba’s Fidel Castro and his brother, and even Iran’s president, began to signal a new tone.
Right around the same time there was a slight glimmer of hope for another leader who believes in consensus. In Israel the Kadima party held a leadership vote, won by Tzipi Livni, one of the nation’s leading voices for the two-state solution. In Israel she has earned a reputation as honest, clean, and sticking to her principles, but her chances were shut down. How it went down, it’s summarized in the excerpt below:
While election results gave Kadima the most seats in the Knesset, parties to the right in Israel’s political spectrum gained enough seats that a coalition government under Kadima leadership was unlikely. As a result, Israeli president Shimon Peres asked Netanyahu and [his party] Likud (which received one less seat than Kadima in the elections) to form a government; this is the first time in Israel’s history that the party with the most seats was not asked to govern.(Quote from Wikipedia, which used as sources The International Herald Tribune and The Associated Press, 02/20/09.)
Netanyahu is a hard liner who does not believe in the two-state solution and as per The Washington Post’s article, believes the “U.S. backed peace talks a waste of time”. Many will point to inane excuses for this strange turn of affairs where this woman leader, who believes in consensus, despite being voted in the majority, was unable to obtain her deserved position, which instead was given to a hard-liner, an old guy with last century’s political mindset, who is certainly not likely to help the Middle East peace process with the Palestinians.
Netanyahu’s right-wing hard-line coalition reminds me of the right-wing hardliners here in the US, which were in charge during the past 8 years and had a huge hand on the spiraling down of world peace into the dangerous levels it is today. The damage caused by the misguided conduct of the Bush/Cheney administration, many agree have caused formerly friendly countries to stop supporting the US –many in Latin America– and we all agree it cannot be overturned overnight.
Those who rose to power in the midst of the discontent with the US foreign policy are doing all possible to hang on to it today, legitimally or not. Chavez got “re-elected”, to complete his 10th year in office, despite protests and contests of the “election results”. Correa in Ecuador –Chavez’ little “pup”–not only got “re-elected” this year, but through a misleading referendum for a new constitution–rumored to have been authored in Venezuela– under the promise of more jobs, land for the poor, better healthcare and social security, buried a clause that secured his “presidency” for terms longer than the two-allotted terms, with Nicaragua and Bolivia going down the same path.
Watching Obama in the world stage in Cairo and seeing the results of the Lebanese elections soon after, lean their newly elected leadership pro-west and defeat the dangerous hardliners, made me hopeful, that perhaps there would be a turn around towards overall world peace. The events that unfolded on the days leading to the Iranian election yesterday, made many of us feel even more hopeful, that despite the growing threat of North Korea, Al Qaeda and the extremists in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Iran could come around and become an important ally in the troubled Middle East. I even had hoped that the lives of thousands of women in Iran would be improved under the modern progressive thinker Mousavi seems to be.
I was patiently watching the events of the election, ready to unfold an article –after a likely Mohadinejad defeat– about a new more hopeful era, where the beacon of cooperation and mutual respect among nations had begun to lead us into world peace. The election of Mousavi in Iran would have meant a total rejection of another right-wing hardliner, a war monger like Bush and Cheney, aligned with the religious right, who only cares to secure his own agenda without truly caring for the citizens nor the rest of the world.
To my dismay, the news today has been a setback to the hope of many. I remember well how sad, surprised and hopeless I felt for the people –and the women– of Pakistan when Benazir Bhutto was assassinated. My feeling is similar today in regards to the results of the Iranian elections. As many of you know I am not from the Middle East, yet as a New Yorker with Latin American roots, I consider myself a citizen of the world and so I carefully follow world affairs, because it’s no surprise that sooner or later world events affect us all, no matter what corner of the world.
What’s more, as a woman I follow the plight of other women around the world. I cheer for those who are bold enough to take on political leadership roles, despite the odds, and hope for their success. Like the wise Dr. Chopra, I agree that there is a need for a more balanced mentality in world leadership, and the feminine mentality can bring that balance. I also feel for the sad situation of so many women around the world, who are still powerless, in the lowly status of second-class citizens, who in many occasions are even treated as property. There is still a long way to go for this other half of the world.
I was hoping to write a more cheerful post today, pointing at what could have been an election that clearly showed the will of the people and one more positive step to help women in that corner of the world. Today’s fraudulent “re-election” of the right-wing sponsored, hardliner Ahmadinejad in Iran is a blow and a mockery of the concept of democracy.
Unfortunately this is not new, yet it never ceases to surprise me. And as much as I wanted to write about the presidency of Mr. Obama, having lit a bright beacon of hope, leading the world up the higher road of peace and cooperation, I can only say that at best, right now the light of hope, for world peace, international good will, and the cause of women around the world, is flickering, yet it remains alive, for I believe he’s not the only one working hard out there looking to make a positive difference.
Tomorrow is a new day, and as much as I didn’t think I’d get through after the John Kerry defeat in 2006, life will go on for most of us, and we can only hope for a better day, for the emergence of enlightened leaders and better balance in the mindset of the world stage, where women can gain the overdue and well-deserved respectful place. Having Mr. Obama at the White House remains a hopeful beginning. I can only hope others like him will follow sooner rather than later, for there seems to be too many bad guys with selfish and backward agendas out there.
