But for all their variety of appearance and expertise, they share many attitudes that go beyond trad- itional Republicanism to embrace the worlds of modern business and self-help, with a strong underpinning of values derived from religious faith.Here was retired General Colin Powell, quickly followed by the fresh female face of Condoleezza Rice. Here were two people foreign governments already knew from the administration of George Bush snr and from the Gulf War alliance. There was no question about their commitment to Nato or to America’s engagement abroad.But the appointments that followed show the outline of a coalition that may be less to Europe’s liking, particularly if the issues of the next four years are, as they have increasingly been, not arms control or deterrence, but peacekeeping, trade policy and first world/ third world dilemmas.If John Ashcroft’s appointment is confirmed by the Senate, he will become America’s chief law officer, the person who negotiates anti-terrorist provisions and the treatment of asylum-seekers and sets the tone in civil rights cases.Mr Ashcroft, who bizarrely lost his seat to a Democrat candidate who died in a plane crash before polling began, is closely tied to Christian conservatives. He opposes abortion and gun control and opposed the US government’s pursuit of tobacco companies, which tightened regulations, raised prices and will compensate states for the cost of treating smoking-related diseases.The Treasury Secretary-to-be, Paul O’Neill, was last in government in the Ford admin- istration and headed two highly traditional industries, at International Paper and the conglomerate, Alcoa. The record of Alcoa as an employer and steward of the environment is commendable – in US terms, where regulations are often lax compared with Europe.Mr O’Neill’s views on the economy are expected to centre on US industry.
If the US economy turns down, as it threatens to do, it may be America First, and no repetition of Mexican or Asian bail-outs.The Agriculture Secretary-designate, Anne Veneman, is a lawyer with experience of negotiating international trade deals, and a commitment to biotechnology and foods of the future. Her predecessor, Dan Glickman, was coming around to the view that Europe’s “precautionary principle” applied to genetically modified food might not be so misguided. Ms Veneman may be less amenable to persuasion.The underlying tone has probably been set. Mr Bush seems intent on presiding over a very American cabinet, and finding a common language could be much harder than it was in the time of Bill Clinton.. President Clinton met chief Israeli and Palestinian negotiators at the White House yesterday in what was expected to be the swansong of his Middle East peace efforts as president.
Hopes had been running high earlier in the week that US mediators might be able to break the six-month deadlock between the two sides, but by Thursday night these had evaporated in a barrage of mutual recriminations. President Clinton met chief Israeli and Palestinian negotiators at the White House yesterday in what was expected to be the swansong of his Middle East peace efforts as president. Hopes had been running high earlier in the week that US mediators might be able to break the six-month deadlock between the two sides, but by Thursday night these had evaporated in a barrage of mutual recriminations.
Yesterday’s hour-long meeting seemed little more than a formality before the two teams left Washington. Further talks were not ruled out in the four weeks that remain of the Clinton presidency, but the prospect for an agreement looked remote. There was no longer talk, as there had been just 48 hours before, of a Washington summit meeting in January to finalise the elusive peace agreement – and crown Mr Clinton’s two terms in office.The options under discussion yesterday were a new round of talks, or the dispatch of a US envoy to the region, possibly the outgoing special envoy, Dennis Ross, or the National Security Adviser, Sandy Berger.Palestinian negotiators in Washington had accused the Israelis of backtracking on the amount of territory they were prepared to hand over.Israeli officials, however, said there had to be give and take on both sides: they appeared to be pressing the Palestinians to scale down their demand for the right of return of all refugees to Israeli territory.The US Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, met the negotiators for two hours on Friday night for what were described as “very serious” – but also inconclusive – discussions. The sticking points are the elements that made up the final stage of the Oslo accords, finalised shortly after Mr Clinton took office: the status of Jerusalem, control and access to holy sites and the return of refugees.All parties, the US mediators included, acknowledge that these were always going to be the most difficult areas, which is why they were left until last. The upsurge in violence since the summer, however, has complicated negotiations, while also illustrating the fierce passions that both Israeli and Palestinian leaders have to take into account in reaching any agreement..
The title sounds a little sinister – it means Slyly, Slyly, Quietly, Quietly – but the new year’s big new Bollywood film was meant to be a thoroughly harmless experience. “Chori Chori Chupke Chupke is a unique thriller for the whole family,” gushed one of Bombay’s showbiz websites. “Unique because there is no crime committed, no villain, no vamp, not even a single negative character in the film.”
The title sounds a little sinister – it means Slyly, Slyly, Quietly, Quietly – but the new year’s big new Bollywood film was meant to be a thoroughly harmless experience. “Chori Chori Chupke Chupke is a unique thriller for the whole family,” gushed one of Bombay’s showbiz websites. “Unique because there is no crime committed, no villain, no vamp, not even a single negative character in the film.”
But the film’s lillywhite story line has not saved it from the clutches of the Bombay police. This week they impounded all prints of the film, which was due for release on 28 December, claiming to have proof that its finance came from expatriate Indian gangsters based in the Persian Gulf But that was only the start of the film’s woes.
Last week its producer, Nazim Rizvi, was charged under Maharashtra state’s stringent new Control of Organised Crime Act with conspiracy to kill a number of Bollywood’s most famous names for failing to cooperate with the gangsters who allegedly control much of Bombay’s movie output. Salman Khan, the film’s balding, muscle-bound star, was hauled in by Bombay police last Saturday and interrogated for six hours He was released without charge. The police promised that more glamorous police yard photo-ops will follow.Bollywood is the home of many clichéed plots and in a sense this one is the hoariest of the lot. Thanks to the sclerotic dispensations of Indian socialism, India’s fabulously productive and popular film industry, churning out some 800 saccharine feature films every year, was for many years refused recognition as an officially approved industry. Its finances existed in a murky netherworld: no one knew how much the stars were really paid, how much the films cost to make, where the money came from or where it went. It was widely believed that Bombay’s prosperous gangsters, flush with money from extortion and drug-dealing, used the industry to launder (and multiply) their cash.Two years ago the central government very belatedly gave Bollywood the status of a legitimate industry in which entrepreneurs could invest in a regulated fashion. But old habits doubtless die hard.This month’s operation by Bombay’s joint police commissioner, D Sivanandan, is believed to be the first time the authorities have attempted to crack down on Bollywood’s links with organised crime.
