top of page
  • bluesky
  • Facebook
  • YouTube

What the Presidential Candidates Say – and Don't Say

Mar 20, 2008
2 min read

Both Russia and the United States have been undergoing presidential electoral campaigns of quite different forms. Will there be any significant change in the governance of the two countries? The question is worth contemplating.

The new Russian president, 42-year-old Dimitry Medvedev, has already been elected in a landslide. He is almost alone in Vladimir Putin’s inner circle with no history in the KGB (or, as it is known today, the FSB). Medvedev is a lawyer by training, but most recently headed the immense Gazprom company. He is reputedly far more liberal than Putin, who picked him as his successor. Almost everyone expects him to do the bidding of his mentor, who is becoming his subordinate, the prime minister. (Medvedev could resign very soon, enabling Putin legally to run again for the presidency.)

Despite being considered a cipher, Medvedev’s campaign speeches indicated a relatively democratic outlook. For example, he said: “Russia is a country of legal nihilism. No European country can boast such a universal disregard for the rule of law.” He also stated that: “Freedom is inseparable from the actual recognition by the people of the power of law. The supremacy of the law should become one of our basic values.” And further: “One of the key elements of our work in the next four years will be ensuring the independence of our legal system from the executive and legislative branches of power.” (That will be progress.)

Turning to the United States, the most forward-looking candidate is Barack Obama. While he gives inspirational speeches, he is often accused of providing few specific details. True, but he spells out his commitments on his web site, www.barackobama.com. (Click on “issues” at the top of the page.) Thus you may be surprised to discover that he intends to reduce carbon emissions by 80 percent by 2050 and will invest heavily in clean energy. Obama is the only candidate who opposed the Iraq War (Hillary Clinton voted for it and John McCain still supports fighting it).

Unlike the other presidential candidates, Obama remarkably promises to work toward the complete elimination of nuclear weapons. A section titled “Toward a Nuclear Free World” pledges: “Obama will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons, and pursue it. Obama will always maintain a strong deterrent as long as nuclear weapons exist. But he will take several steps down the long road toward eliminating nuclear weapons. He will stop the development of new nuclear weapons; work with Russia to take U.S. and Russian ballistic missiles off hair trigger alert; seek dramatic reductions in U.S. and Russian stockpiles of nuclear weapons and material; and set a goal to expand the U.S.Russian ban on intermediate range missiles so that the agreement is global.”

Don’t hold your breath, but a year from now, there may be two leaders in the world who will sit down together and sensibly address the dangers that face our planet. There’s hope!

Recent Posts

See All
SfP Bulletin archive

SfP Bulletin February 2017 The President’s Corner: Science for Peace as a Foreign Language Metta Spencer Report of the Working Group on...

 
 
 

Comments


E-7705 

An important e-petition about Canada peacekeepers headcount

Science for Peace believes the UN peacekeeping mission program is an important tool for minimizing conflicts around the world. Guided by impartiality and undertaken only with the consent of warring parties, missions under this program are critical in the efforts to transition violent societies to peace.

 

We know that Canada has a long history of supporting these missions and has earned a significant reputation for its expertise in this area. Thus we have been dismayed by the fact that the actual number of Canadian peacekeepers has been drastically reduced over the last decade. Despite the paucity of our country’s contribution, we know that Canada is nonetheless recognized for its leadership and know-how.

 

We want to dramatically enlarge the contingent of Canadian Peacekeepers and play our part in the worthy project of reducing violence in this turbulent world. As well, in light of ongoing changes in Peacekeeping technology, we believe Canada should invest majorly in tech training and support for our Peacekeepers, and at the same time furnish such skill development to countries less able to provide this for their own contingents.

 

To focus public attention on this critical issue, we have created an e-petition to the government and are seeking your support.

Please have a look and sign e-7705 if you agree.

 

www.ourcommons.ca/petitions/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-7705

 

 

Gilles Fecteau

Treasurer, Science for Peace

Science for Peace

A Peace Education NGO

Based in Toronto

 

​355-15 King’s College Circle
Toronto, Ontario M5S 3H7 Canada

Follow Us:

Emailinfo@scienceforpeace.org

Registered Charity: 893240861 RR 0001

  • BlueSky
  • X
  • Facebook
  • YouTube

Get Monthly Updates

bottom of page