America's election

The view from afar

The Middle East watches America's election

THE thrills and spills of the presidential primaries in America are captivating audiences far beyond its shores. And not unreasonably so: whoever makes it to the White House will influence far more than America. In particular many in the Middle East are engrossed in the American campaign.

Israel, perhaps inevitably, has paid most attention to the contest so far. America’s closest ally in the Middle East, its countrymen take great interest in the identity of the next president. Haaretz and the Jerusalem Post, prominent left- and right-leaning Israeli newspapers respectively, both devote special sections to the subject.

Haaretz invites panellists to rank all the rivals for the presidency on a scale of one (the worst) to ten. On this score the Republican candidate, John McCain (7.75), and one Democratic contender, Hillary Clinton (7.5), are neck-and-neck. The Democratic front-runner, Barack Obama, trails far behind (5.12). Of the 26 candidates who have been in the race, only five score lower than Mr Obama. The panellists worry that Mr Obama lacks experience and is insufficiently enthusiastic about the “war on terror”. In short they conclude that he may not be a good friend to Israel. In contrast Mr McCain is described as “hawkish but realistic”, the right person for the job. The Jerusalem Post is enthusiastic about him too and says simply: “McCain gets it.”

Whether such panellists and journalists are right, of course, is debatable. Mr Obama, who has greater popularity among Palestinians, could be a more credible peacebroker in the region. His comment that “nobody is suffering more than the Palestinian people” was well received in the Arab world (not so well in Israel), where in general Mr Obama is better liked than his Democratic and Republican rivals. His expressed willingness to talk to America’s enemies means he is generally reckoned to be less aggressive than, for example, Mr McCain, who talks of bombing Iran. Al Ahram Weekly, the English edition of the leading Egyptian daily, goes so far as to describe him as “the favourite US presidential candidate of people in this part of the world.”

Things that have proved tricky for Mr Obama at home are a boon for him in parts of the Middle East. That his middle name, Hussein, is reckoned to be something of a liability in America is in turn seen in parts of the Middle East as evidence of American Islamophobia. Mr Obama’s first name also appeals to Arab speakers: Barack comes from the Arabic word for “blessing” (Mr Obama could perhaps reassure Jewish-American voters that it is also linked to the Hebrew “Baruch”). His opposition to the Iraq war stands him in good stead, too, in contrast to Mrs Clinton and Mr McCain. Some Arabs are less smitten. Anti-Syrian politicians and activists in Lebanon may worry about Mr Obama’s willingness to start talks with Iran, fearing that they could result in America “selling out” Lebanon in exchange for a deal elsewhere in the region. But, for now, he seems to be the candidate of choice among Arabs.

Opinion in the Middle East is likely to have little or no effect on the race in America. But Jewish-Americans and Arab-Americans may be influenced. Mrs Clinton has fared marginally better among Jewish-American voters so far: a recent Gallup poll put her at 48% support to Mr Obama’s 43%. But according to Keevoon, an Israeli research firm, a significant majority of Israeli Jews prefer Mrs Clinton (61%) to Mr Obama (12%). As Mrs Clinton and Mr Obama continue to slug it out for the Democratic nomination, Israel’s preference for Mrs Clinton may yet push more Jewish voters her way.