What the pro-Kerry propaganda of European television and the resulting favorable votes express is that John Kerry has a mandate from abroad for doing exactly what he promises at home not to do.

If you are away from a place for some time you are likely to see your location in a new light upon your return. I have just been in the US for a month and my re-entry here has, indeed, enabled me to be surprised by what is otherwise “my usual.” It being election time and the season to bash Bush, it is hardly surprising that many of my surprises pertain to America’s impending choice. Instead of trying to pen a general exposé I will only take two otherwise minor items to illustrate a major trend that will be with us regardless of who becomes President.

First, my local TV’s evening offerings. Switzerland 1 has a culture program. One segment is dedicated to the “cultural workers” whose “anti-Bush campaign” could influence the election, especially the behavior of young voters. Germany 1 has Kerry Against Bush, while Germany 2 shows you A Rip Across the Stars and Stripes. What they mean is revealed by a later showing of The Cowboy against the Gentleman.  Arte, a German-French broadcaster, has as a warm up, An Act of State: the Assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King. It is followed by a “Report” on the election and then by one about US foreign policy. Austria 2 brings a piece about “The Count-Down,” including revelations regarding how the Patriot Act undermines the freedoms America alleges to fight for. Then comes something on the chaos to be expected in Florida, topped by a segment about Islam as a boogey man. So prepared you get in the next offering on John Kerry — the Challenger.  The tone is set by the not-quite-that-subtle and notably balanced piece on the Cowboy and the Gentleman.

Earlier, while surfing the web I hit on an interesting site. US-election.org's revelations even managed to surprise hardened me. The page helps American Expats to register to vote on an absentee ballot and also encourages foreigners to cast their consultative vote. This opinion survey allows one to access data on regions, such as “Europe,” and also to get the results of individual countries. On the 28th I got these results. World: Bush 18%, Kerry 68, Nader 5. Europe: Bush 11, Kerry 72, Nader 7. Germany: Bush 8, Kerry 80, Nader 6. France is decidedly carried away by pro Americanism with Bush 19, Kerry 68, Nader 6. Russia scores Bush 24, Kerry 67. The Anglo-American relationship is special as Bush gets 9, Kerry 74, Nader 8%. Switzerland is neutral with 4% for Bush, 83 Kerry and Nader 5. Prepared to blush, I checked Hungary. She gives Bush 15, 69 goes for Kerry and 13 are allocated to Nader.

Let me continue by stating the obvious. There is a clear link between the TV programs offered and the opinions expressed.

Now, while the number of the actual votes cast is small enough to produce scientifically unfounded results, the political conclusions are, in the light of the clear trend, significant. Europe is for Kerry. The Kerry vote is for the real Kerry that masses of unaware US voters have missed behind an ingenious camouflage. The folks here are for the implicit hard-core Kerry program. Realistically, Europe is not confused by slogans about “making America strong again.” It knows that the essence of the Kerry promise is in effect to cut and run. That is what they are voting for. The percentages are high because the anti-Americans of old vintage are joined by the head-in-the-sand crowd. The latter see no danger for themselves as they assume that the terrorists have America and not Western Civilization as their target. They also believe that concessions will bring to the “capitulationists” the benefit of immunity from attacks as a reward. Naturally this reward pre-supposes that someone, such as the US, will doggedly resist. Immunity would be harvested once this struggle is betrayed. (The errors behind this reasoning are another subject.)

In summary, the vote reflects the joint effort of two groups. One misunderstands the challenge of Islamists, the other reflects the wishes of those who are always — be it Communism or Jihadism — against America. Therefore, those Americans who consider “the world is against us” which is “the fault of Bush” as a factor in casting their ballot should be most careful. They run the danger of supportively agreeing with something they would consciously reject.

Europe wants a strong America when Europe’s interests are to be protected in the context of a massive, direct and existentially determining challenge. When the safeguarding of these interests is the second link in a chain, such as when America is in the first line of trenches engaged in defending her own interests, Europe, misguided (as in 1914, 1933-39) wishes a weak America. Let me be more precise. We are talking about a USA that is strong enough to challenge (at the moment the Islamists) but not determined enough to act decisively. In this case safety — or the illusion thereof — can be purchased by stabbing her in the back. The higher American preparedness is, the more the action against her will be worth to her foe. Accordingly, the reward for infidelity will rise.

There is a further conclusion that issues from the foregoing. In case you accept that Bush’ ineptitude has deprived America from the support of her “allies” you should be told that, even against the Soviets, this support was more a collective declaration of faith based on a myth, rather than a fact anchored in reality. The Iraq affair proves that America is, willy-nilly, forced to “go it alone.” What one did not have can not be lost. Determined action can only provoke a clear demonstration that the conveniently assumed support is not available. Therefore, regardless of the merits or de-merits of acting against Saddam: Bush did not destroy the Atlantic Alliance. His perseverance merely demonstrated the compact’s long suppressed weaknesses.

Once we are this far, a further fact — and a major fiction of the campaign — is revealed. Kerry might be able to accomplish a lot. However, there is one thing Kerry promises that he can not get. This is the support of Europe, eminently of France. Oddly enough France has made it abundantly clear that her policy will not change. Somehow, — call it generously an accident — the news got little publicity in the US.  The implications: Kerry will have full support where it is not needed, that is for fleeing Iraq. Anything else he might undertake, short of surrendering, will at best be met by Europe’s neutrality, most likely by her active and demonstrative hostility. The Kerry mandate from Europe (see the votes above) is for open or disguised surrender. The question before us is whether the American voter will notice and if aware, whether he will support this endeavor.

What the pro-Kerry propaganda of local TV and the resulting favorable votes express is that JFK has a mandate from abroad for doing exactly what he promises at home not to do. Since even politicians are to some extent bound outwardly by their promises, Kerry is likely to disappoint foreign public opinion. At the same time his election will encourage the Jihadists who will thereafter fear America less for her strength and despise her more for her weakness. The upshot will be more terrorism. Some of it will be directed against the USA, a lot of it will target Europe; because weakness harvests no reward.