absolutely alex’s adventures & times

It’s hard not to feel sorry for the plight of Ingrid Betancourt, the Franco-Colombian politician who has been held hostage by the Colombian rebel group Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, for over six years.

The once-thriving woman was kidnapped by FARC after she tried to negotiate with them and is believed to be seriously ill. Recently freed hostages had expressed fears that Betancourt’s condition could deteriorate if she did not receive medical attention soon.

Betancourt is reportedly chained up now because she tried escaping from the rebels, who besides fighting the Colombian government, are notorious for smuggling cocaine and kidnapping Colombian politicians, civilians and even a few Americans.

Understandably, the French government, together with the Spanish and Swiss authorities, has sent a humanitarian/ medical mission to the Colombian jungles where the FARC are based in the hopes of getting Betancourt out to receive medical treatment.

But their approach could have inadvertently worsened things for Betancourt.

Their action, which had not come with prior negotiations or agreements with FARC rebels, might have ticked the rebels off and jeopardized Betancourt’s chance for freedom.

“The French medical mission is not acceptable and much less so when it is not the result of a prior agreement,” FARC’s ruling secretariat said in a statement.

“We do not act under blackmail or under pressure from media campaigns.”

The operation cannot for faulted for its good intention. But it was badly handled and seemed ill thought out. The European governments should have known that FARC comprises merciless terrorists and appealing to their sympathy for Betancourt would not be effective. Could it be that their priority was not just to save a possibly dying woman, but more so to play to the three countries’ home audience, to prove that action has been taken, however flawed it was?

France especially, had made it a priority to have Betancourt freed and might have hoped that its medical mission would move FARC. But by flying there unilaterally, without first having worked something out with either the Colombian government or FARC smacks of rashness to the point of folly.

Experts worry that the latest French initiative could worsen things.

“This rejection contributes to the contamination of the atmosphere,” Alfredo Rangel at Bogota’s Security and Democracy Foundation think tank told Reuters.

The International Committee of the Red Cross would have been an ideal intermediary for the French to use to obtain an agreement, given its track recording of securing hostage release. But the French had not approached it for help at all.

The French seemed not to have learned from an earlier failure. In 2003, it too, had tried to send a mission to free Betancourt but ended up empty-handed and received criticisms from the Colombian and Brazilian governments for its actions instead.

If the French were serious about helping Betancourt, they should forget about grandstanding and wasting taxpayers’ money unnecessarily by flying those fruitless attempts over to Colombia. They should have tried harder to reach out to the rebels or intermediaries behind the scenes to get Betancourt freed. Flying in unannounced will only raise the FARC’s suspicions and harden its resolve. That means poor Betancourt will remain captive longer.

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

It must be the essential lesson in Politics 101 for all heads of states, presidents and prime ministers – when your poll numbers are suffering at home and nothing is going well domestically, pack your bags and focus on foreign policy.

Two leaders who have taken this lesson seriously are the US and French presidents, George W Bush and Nicolas Sarkozy, respectively.

The famously travel-phobic US leader has lately taken a shine to chalking up air miles on Air Force One.

Bush’s just-ended Middle East tour took a staggeringly-long eight days, almost an eternity for the man who hates traveling and disruptions to his predictable routine.

He was photographed holding the hands and arms of kings and religious leaders, awkwardly wielding swords presented to him as presents and laying wreaths at shrines.

Perhaps it’s not surprising that the man who had spent the last seven years of his presidency playing the tough, go-it-alone cowboy suddenly turned over a new leaf and succumbing to this tedious little thing called diplomacy.

Bush is a lame duck president with appalling approval ratings at home, in desperate need to find some way to salvage his legacy while stealing some column inches — especially as the presidential primaries of both the Democratic and Republic parties rage on and suck up all the media attention at home.

In truth, Bush’s trip to the Middle East will be remembered as being futile.

The Arabs, while making nice to Bush, are unlikely to give him what he wants – progress on the peace process between the Israelis and the Palestinians, and support against Iran, which Bush still insists has nuclear weapons ambitions, despite last November’s report by the US National Intelligence Estimate stating otherwise.

So even though there are no results or breakthroughs worth reporting, other than photo opportunities, the Middle East trip wouldn’t be all for the US president this year. He will also be visiting China for the Olympics, Japan and a few African countries. What better way to forget his troubles at home and look statesman-like than to be standing with other foreign leaders amid fanfare and pageantry?

French president Sarkozy, though no lame duck, has also been constantly on the move, country-hopping through various regions. In fact, Sarkozy was a step ahead of Bush, landing in Middle Eastern countries such as Abu Dhabi and Saudi Arabia just a week before Bush.

Sarkozy, on his part, is trying to detract from growing discontent, increasing impasse and floundering approval ratings at home. Recently, only 45 per cent of his countrymen told pollsters that they approved of his performance, the first time his ratings are below 50 per cent. Those who had a negative opinion of him similarly rose, with his negative rating climbing up to 48 per cent, from 43 percent previously.

These feelings were likely to have stemmed from the accumulation of bad news in the past few months, from the public transportation strike that caused Paris to come to a standstill and the unrest with immigrant youths, to the continued weak economy and rising prices.

Perhaps he is also feeling the whiplash to his excessively public (and thus very un-French), relationship with former supermodel turned singer, Carla Bruni, which had the French media in a tizzy of speculation over whether the couple have already secretly married. The paparazzi had chased them down when they vacationed recently in Jordan and Egypt. Next, they would be jetting off to India, yet another overseas jaunt.

Ah, all perfectly understandable, of course. Because when the going gets tough, don’t the tough usually get going and spring for a change of scenery?

Perhaps the militant French unions have met their match in French president Nicolas Sarkozy.

Last week’s 24-hour strike by France’s transport, gas and electricity unions might have seen a massive turnout and Sarkozy himself suffered the indignity of power cuts in his home. But public opinion seemed to be in agreement with the government’s stance of the need for pension reforms for certain public sector workers, rather than the traditional sympathy and solidarity with strikers.

While Sarkozy’s political capital has been dwindling since his election, he does have the weight of the public behind him in this instance. 55 per cent of the public told the French newspaper, Le Figaro, that the strikes were not justified. It helps that Sarkozy has been preparing the French on this, even from as early as during his campaign for the presidency, when he had made an issue of France needing changes to its pension system.

More than having momentum behind him is the master stroke of announcing his divorce from his glamorous ex-model wife, Cecilia, on the very day that the strike had been scheduled. In one fell swoop, he switched the conversation, and headlines, from the disruptions to everyday life, to his personal life.

The state of the presidential couple’s marriage has been much speculated upon in the past few weeks. When the end was finally made official, the French press was only too happy to morph into American-style, detail-hungry packs, with one French paper, Liberation, even screaming in an ENGLISH headline “Desperate Housewife”, to describe Cecilia’s situation. What a change from a society that discreetly hushed up former president Francois Mitterrand’s life-long affair and daughter born out of wedlock, until the man passed away.

As a testament to his political genius, the strike does not seem to have affected Sarkozy too much. Nor did it go on into the following days, as some union leaders had threatened. However, another round of strikes could be planned for November.

But Sarkozy seemed determine to bounce back quickly, leaving the matter behind him and drawing headlines for a new issue this week, by announcing France’s “green” plans and hobnobbing with recent Nobel Peace Prize winner, Al Gore. Perhaps the tide really is turning in France, and the streets are not as powerful as they once were.

The 94th Tour de France race is starting tomorrow in London.

But would anyone really care?

After the spate of scandals about top cyclists doping and last year’s winner Floyd Landis still under a cloud of suspicion of having shot up to win, it’s doubtful if many people would be paying much attention to this year’s proceedings, let alone tune in to watch on Versus.

The television network has admitted that the reputation of professional cycling had been tainted with an ad it took out in the newspaper, USA Today. Ratings are also expected to be low, after last year’s race had a 49 per cent drop in ratings from that of 2005’s. The network’s senior vice president of marketing conceded to the Wall Street Journal that a “scandal-free Tour will be crucial this year” not only for the Tour, but also for the network.

I got hooked to cycling after I heard about this rider named Lance Armstrong from my friends, who were raving about how he came back from fighting cancer, to fight the mountains of France, and amazingly, win.

Armstrong kept us riveted and gave many of us many more reasons to keep watching in the subsequent years, winning the title seven times in a row. At that time, I was convinced that the Tour is the greatest sporting event as it taxes the human body and spirit, to produce the finest athletes of any type of sport.

Armstrong himself had been accused many times of doping but that has never been proven.

But after the scandals kept coming, the Tour has become almost farcical, breaking many cycling fans’ hearts and losing credibility and viewership with most, except with the most fanatical cycling enthusiasts.

Amid all the scandals surrounding marque names, it threw the spotlight on the likes of Ivan Basso, Jan Ullrich and Tyler Hamilton, and took away attention from emerging new stars, not that there had been many coming forth either. Which makes this year’s race wide open for anyone’s taking. On the flip side, it also lacks the star power to draw viewers.

The New York Times published a story today about who this year’s possible contenders could be. At the same time, there’s the hope expressed that this will be the nadir of the Tour and new, clean riders will crop up.

Either way, it’s going to be an uphill climb for the race — both literally and metaphorically, to regain the reverence it used to inspire and evoke.

So is Floyd Landis innocent of doping to win last year’s Tour de France?

In today’s edition of the UK newspaper, the Guardian, Landis maintains his innocence, and he tells the newspaper he is determined to prove his innocence, as his prize money from racing dwindles while his legal bills soar to pay for his defense. In the last year, his legal fees came up to $2 million.

“Do I think it’s been worth it? Yes, regardless of the result. It is not in my personality to take something like this and not defend myself. Athletes have walked away in the past because they didn’t have the resources or the energy to stand up to Usada (the US Anti-Doping Agency) and Wada (World Anti-Doping Agency) and this laboratory in Paris. What people do not realize is these organizations make mistakes but they cover up those mistakes to protect themselves. That’s completely unacceptable so, whatever it has cost me personally, of course it has been worth it,” he told the Guardian.

Landis sticks to his tune, even as his urine samples have yielded positive results for excessive testosterone. Both his “A” sample and a series of “B” samples have tested positive for testosterone. Add to that the bizarre story of Landis’ former manager blackmailing former cycling champion Greg LeMond, who was scheduled to give evidence on the side of Usada.

In the interview, Landis further hints at his retirement from the sport, “Why would I want to go back and deal with the people who are running the sport? As I said, they are clowns.”

As the series of scandal in the sport stacks up, the Tour de France’s organizers are taking some measures to stem the scepticism building against the sport. All the racers are to be asked to sign the document, which will confirm that they are not currently involved in any ongoing anti-doping investigations and that they are prepared to produce their DNA if necessary, for it to be compared with the blood seized by the Spanish police during the Operation Puerto inquiry into a blood-doping ring, the Guardian reported. Those that don’t sign the document could be barred from the race.

In addition, the cyclists also pledge to surrender one year’s salary if they violated any anti-doping rules.

Will these measures be enough to deter cheats? Keep your eyes peeled.

In typical French fashion, voters have resurrected their complex contrarian characteristic and rejected the talk that France would face a tidal “blue wave”.

True to form, they struck a blow, though not mortal, to their newly-elected President Nicolas Sarkozy, by denying his party, the Union for a Popular Movement, the commanding landslide that has been predicted for weeks. Its bitter rival, the Socialist party, managed to stage a stunning comeback after its recent defeat in the presidential elections, winning 25 per cent more seats than in the previous parliamentary election.

More embarassingly, one of Mr Sarkozy’s most important ministers, Alain Juppe, was unceremoniously dumped by voters in Bordeaux. Juppe had been appointed to a powerful superministry that oversees the environment, transport and sustainable development. He has resigned from Sarkozy’s cabinet.

Though humbled at the polls, Sarkozy could take comfort in the fact that the UMP still holds a parliamentary majority, which would allow the reforms he has promised to be pushed through this summer, such as moving away from the 35-hour work week, guaranteeing minimum service during public transport strikes and clamping down on lawbreakers and illegal immigration. A cunning move, indeed, as most of the country is likely to be too busy holidaying during summer to rally in the streets against the reforms.

Whilst the celebration for UMP might be muted as it lost seats this time round, it should celebrate the fact that not only does it have a clear majority (350 out of 577 seats, with its allies ), it has also achieved the tough feat of becoming the first ruling party in thirty years to be returned to power.

Sarkozy should also be relieved that the French electorate has not subjected him to the kind of “cohabitation” that his predecessor Jacque Chirac had been forced to put up with – when they elected a Socialist parliament after the right-wing Chirac captured the presidency.

The Socialist Party had cleverly harped on fears during their campaign that François Fillon, the Prime Minister, was going to raise value added tax by two percentage points. The tax is seen as being favorable to businesses and high-income earners and could have been a strong factor that swung voters towards the Socialists at the last minute.

But while the Socialists celebrate their unexpected victory and make claims of having resurrected itself, it remains an opposition party with slim chances of challenging the government effectively. It remains divided as its leader Francois Hollande carried on a very public spat with its most popular figure and presidential candidate, Segolene Royal. Reports say that not only is she trying to take control of the party, they have both also announced their separation. Hollande and Royal have been a couple for decades and have four children together, although they have never married.

“I will defend my convictions while respecting others,” pledges French President Nicholas Sarkozy, declaring his guiding philosophy, as he plunges into his job with relish, giving an opinion on anything or everyhing.

This is a man who has the energy of a man half his age, seems like he is staying up all night thinking through all the biggest issues of the day and is keen to unleash himself and his ideas onto his first big international appearance, at the G8 summit in Germany this Wednesday, while simultaneously projecting the image that France is once again a major player in the world stage.

On the European Union and its role, Sarko has been urging that European leaders accept a new, simplified European treaty that will be ratified by member states through parliamentary votes rather than popular vote, which had sealed the fate of an earlier incarnation through rejection by French and Dutch voters. His philosophy towards the EU has also solidified around the idea of it wielding more power as an economic entity and less in political realms. But at the same time, he told the Financial Times he opposed EU’s trade policy, labeling it “excessively liberal”. It figures. Despite his reformist credentials, Sarko is at the core a protectionist when it comes to French industries, insisting on staying the course on French agriculture and justifying it by explaining that “the security of Europe’s food supplies was vital”.

On the incoming UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Sarko had this piece of advice. “Gordon Brown has advanced and modernized the British economy over 10 years. I hope that in moving from Number 11 to Number 10 Downing Street he understands that Europe is not outmoded.” But Sarko smoothly added, “Europe has need of the UK and the UK has need of Europe.” He further established the groundwork for a smoother transition in his dealings from Tony Blair to Brown, by telling the Financial Times that “I don’t think that everybody shares my opinion. I don’t have this arrogant vision. He is more liberal than I am.”

Sarko, who has long professed his admiration for the US, is also playing nice when asked about US President George W Bush, Iraq and Bush’s recently-announced environmental initiatives. Regarding Iraq, he pulled out the diplomatic card, professing to not being qualified to comment when he doesn’t have troops in Iraq and affirming French support in Afghanistan through continued troop presence. When it came to commenting on Bush’s environmental plan, Sarko called it an “encouraging evolutionary”. This guy looks set to have a great conversation on the sidelines of the G8 summit with Bush. Expect an invitation to Camp David in the mail for him soon.

But really, Sarko seems set to build consensus and make friends everywhere. It’s a smart move that will warm him to the leaders and create an easier basis for doing business. He was equally flattering about German Chancellor Angela Merkel, complimenting her on her leadership in the EU’s rotating presidency and expressing confidence of her ability to push for issues such as reform and the environment through.

The only person that might not get the full assault of Sarko’s charm is Russian President Vladimir Putin. On the latest hissy fit Russia is throwing about the US’ missile plan, Sarko said he plans to have a “frank and direct” discussion with Putin. Though professing to desire a strategic partnership and amicable relations with Russia, Sarko had came out strongly to condemn Moscow’s strengthening authoritarianism and human rights abuses in Chechnya while campaigning for the presidency. Russia is unlikely to forget that quickly.

So it looks like this upcoming G8 summit might be a little more than just boring business as usual with Sarko’s kinetic and involved presence. The attending heads of states will no doubt have to hear plenty of his opinions and contend with a French President with an assertive approach. While it remains to be seen if Sarko will wear them out, the media, especially the European ones, is still nursing its love affair with Sarko. You could bet on seeing, and hearing, a lot of the guy over the next few days.

After 12 years of malaise under Jacques Chirac, France ushered in a hyper-kinetic Nicolas Sarkozy as the new president of the French republic.

Will Sarkozy be able to make the changes he has promised? Will the French have to work more? Is France likely to be revitalized under Sarkozy?

It will be interesting to see if he can face down the most daunting challenge to French presidents: demonstrations. Sarkozy’s predecessors have usually backed down in the face of massive demonstrations and protests out in the streets. It’s hardly going to be easy for Sarkozy, with two of the biggest groups – students and unions – publicly stating their opposition to his proposed measures of university reform and ensuring minimum service during strikes.

Detractors have said that many French governments have usually started their terms promising changes, only to be gradually disillusioned or paralyzed by the French population’s resistance to change. So why would the Sarkozy presidency be any different?

For a start, Sarkozy does have a more reasonable chance of fulfilling his goals, given the comfortable margin by which he won the election, on his platform that France needs to change. It’s a sign that the French are perhaps finally tired of the dysfunction in their system and are betting on Sarkozy being the one to make the necessary changes.

Sarkozy also seemed to have learnt from his previous rival and prime minister Dominique de Villepin’s mistake last year of pushing through the job contract for younger people stealthily and then having to make an embarrassing climbdown as youths took to the streets in revolt, effectively killing his shot at the presidency. Sarkozy will instead follow a plan of having open discussions and persuasion before enacting reforms, making them more palatable to the public while avoiding the kind of fiasco de Villepin had experienced.

Appointing a cabinet with those from outside of his Gaullist circle, like the opposition Socialist party, is another way Sarkozy is hoping to win over the opposition. The word is out that he has offered the foreign ministry portfolio to Bernard Kouchner, the founder of the Nobel-prize-winning Médecins Sans Frontières and a former Socialist health minister. Sarkozy has also reached out to unions and promised to hold conferences on labor issues.

The next five years ahead ought to be interesting for France and Sarkozy. Here’s hoping he will reform France without it losing its allure or essence.

Ooh la la! The French are actually frowning on holidays!

At least that’s what the French opposition is doing, condemning President-elect Nicholas Sarkozy for taking a three-day break in a luxury yacht in Malta before taking office next week.

Words flung at him by the defeated Socialists include “scandalous”, “indecent” and “shocking to the great masses of French”.

Whoa. Am I reading right? Are they actually condemning someone for doing a quintessentially French thing, no, make that a right? This from a nation that loves making “le pont”, basically extending a holiday by taking days off leading to or after a national holiday that falls in the middle of the week, hence creating a long weekend? A place where “the Protestant work ethic had been refused a work permit”, as described by The Guardian?

Wait a minute, weren’t the Socialists the ones who implemented the 35-hour work week in the first place?

It’s all political of course. There are parliamentary elections up next month and the Socialists are firing their salvo in the hope of winning back some dignity through that election. Remember, they had failed for the third successive time at capturing the Presidency.

Give Sarko a break. It’s going to be a tough five years ahead, what with all the fixing that’s needed in France. And his holiday isn’t on taxpayers’ account anyway.

“I have no intention of hiding,” Sarko told reporters. “I have no intention of lying. I have no intention of apologizing. I don’t see the controversy.” Good for him.

He’s got his hands full when he returns. Rioting and protests are already ongoing, with students protesting his proposed higher education reforms while haters continued on their rampage, torching cars and breaking windows of buildings around the country.

If anyone needs a break, it’s this guy.

A remarkable thing happened in France today.

The French elected the son of a Hungarian immigrant to its highest office, the Presidency, allowing Nicolas Sarkozy to occupy the Elysée Palace on May 16. He beat his opponent Socialist party candidate – and a woman no less – Ségolène Royal, taking 53 per cent of the total vote.

The French ought to be proud. The French ideals of Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité seem more than just rhetoric.

It was brave enough to put two outsiders into the final round of the presidential election. For years, the top echelons of French business and politics have been occupied by a select few groomed for those positions from elite schools and universities. Not only is Mr Sarkozy an immigrant’s son, he went to public schools and a state university. Ms Royal was not born of the manor either, being the daughter of an army officer.

Also impressive was the turn out at the polls. That 85 per cent of the 44.5 million registered voters showed up is a clear sign of the electorate’s wish to make a difference, and of France’s vibrant democracy. Notwithstanding the fact that the French love a good debate and politics, interest in this election was noticeably high, as new voter registration grew and people debated in cafes across the country.

Not surprisingly, 20 million people tuned in to watch the final TV showdown between Mr Sarkozy and Ms Royal last week. A two and a half hour debate, at that. That’s a third of the country’s population of 64 million, or about 50 per cent of the voting population.

It’s noteworthy that the French have the maturity to understand they are voting for Mr Sarkozy, and not his spouse. A good thing, as Mrs Sarkozy has been conspicuously absent from his side as he campaigned. That she had a affair with another man a few years ago and told the French media she sees herself jogging in New York’s Central Park in 10 years’ time, did nothing to dent Mr Sarkozy’s standings in the polls. Can you imagine a US presidential candidate getting that kind of support if his spouse behaved the same way?

Imagine too, if a US politician was quoted calling young rioters “scum”. In the political correctness gone wrong atmosphere of the US, the politician would have been strung out to dry, inundated with calls to resign and his political career over. Not for Mr Sarkozy, as French voters thankfully supported his policy of zero tolerance towards violence.

No doubt the pockets of violence and rioting in parts of France after the results show that it’s not all rosy in France. Mr Sarkozy is detested by a large swarth of the population, especially those of immigrant origin. France still has serious problems, ranging from a weak economy, high unemployment to an inability to integrate immigrants, particularly Muslims ones, well. But the French have opted for change by voting in Mr Sarkozy, known for getting things done, his energy and dynamism. There’s hope for France yet.