In 40 days time, the American public will vote for a new President, who then will be sworn in a further two and a half months later - a hell of a lot can happen in this time. Three crises are reaching fever pitch at the moment and at least one will cast a dark shadow over this concluding period. First Iran. Tensions between the United States, Israel and Iran have simmered all year. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's recent speech to the UN in New York has only outraged anti-Iran groups further and now even Obama is expressing outrage at his anti-semitic and confrontational comments. The war of words has continued with the IAEA acting as an ineffectual referee. The longer Iran is perceived to be un-cooperative and obstructionist - the less patient America and Israel will be. An attack on Iran is not considered likely before 4 November, but in the post election vacuum, and if there is an Obama victory, a parting shot by Bush (egged on by Dick Cheney) at Iran's nuclear installations is considered a real possibility.
Will this happen? The Bush administration has had Tehran in its cross hairs for most of its tenure. The "not on my watch" syndrome is a strong influence for Bush and Iran continues to provoke and be defiant. But whether America attacks Iran seems related to the second crisis that dominates US foreign policy. The crisis in Pakistan that is now on all fronts - military, political and economic is making the Iran crisis seem totally innocuous in comparison. The expansion of Taliban-jihadi influence in the tribal areas of north-west Pakistan, the weakness of Islamabad's civilian leadership and the duplicitous role of the military-ISI has created an explosive mix. Pakistan is getting worse every day. It seemed to be on the precipice at the end of last year, after the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, but its state has only detiorated since. On top of this, American and Pakistani troops have exchanged fire, after US Special forces conducted a cross border raid from Afghanistan.
The Bush administration has finally realised the seriousness of the Afghanistan conflict, having been pre-occupied by Iraq for most of the last five years. It also hopes to capture or kill as many Al-Qaida leaders as possible in its remaining months, including possibly the greatest prize Osama Bin Laden. The re-organized Taliban and its Al-Qaida allies are so submerged in the region though, that air raids, lightning operations and certainly conventional operations are fairly ineffective. A large scale bombing campaign might eliminate a score of enemy fighters, but would create an outcry in the region fierce enough to push Pakistan over the edge. Last weekend's suicide attack on the Marriott hotel underlined what everyone knows - Pakistan is facing a grave threat from jihadist terrorism. Repelling the attacks from the safe haven of the Pakistani tribal areas is an immense challenge to the American military, let alone a disorganised Pakistani army. Dealing with this situation is Bush's priority and thus puts Iran on the back burner.
But the two crises are related - logistically at least - Taliban forces have been armed by Iran according to some reports. Pakistan's upheaval and Iran's nuclear ambitions are driven by domestic factors way beyond the influence of Washington policymakers. Bush's role is forgiven in some respects. But the policies of the Bush administration have also made these countries worse, and the president might feel obliged to tidy up his mess in the crudest way possible.
Finally as the credit crunch is approaching its moment of truth, the US treasury is pushing for Congress to approve a $700bn bail out package for American banks. The deal will go through - simply because its failure would end American economic power as we know it. But whether it is the panacea for the global credit crisis is unclear. The American economy may well suffer further for the rest of the year. Whatever happens Bush's economic legacy seems as bad as his foreign policy one. Not only has America moved nearer recession and its previously unrivalled position as the centre for global capital been severely dented, but it has surrendered economic initiative to China and to a lesser extent India, Russia and the EU. One could also argue that the loss of soft power under Bush has made America an unattractive economic prospect as well. The Bush administration has been plagued with incompetent decision making, but fortunately the global financial crisis is such an out of control behemoth that any Bush action will probably make little difference. A parting shot is in the offing, the world will be holding its breath until January 20th.
