In search for Obama

When a couple of years ago - after a prolonged break - I placed an article in the Internet a discussion broke out, and one of the participants asked, 'Who is that Nurlan Ablyazov?' I thought to myself that they forgot Vereschagin. Now I have a chance to present the article together with the magazine before I am 53.

On 11 September 2001 the Twin Towers in New York tragically collapsed and, figuratively speaking, fell on the head and shoulders of president Bush - who just 8 months earlier assumed office - as well as on Dick Cheiny, Donald Rumsfeld and other high-rankers who at the moment found themselves beside the president. Cheiny and Rumsfeld were parts of administration of Bush Sn, and 10 year earlier they participated in the elaboration and carrying out of the military operation Storm in Desert designed to make an incursion into Iraq. The burden of Afghanistan and the entire Iraqi bloody epopee befell those persons.      
Does it mean that when George Bush Jr. miraculously won a victory over Albert Gore in the presidential race-2000 one might safely conclude that America had a presentiment about the impending danger of Al Kaeda, hence the necessity to call up Bush and his team?
I say 'Yes' - а country calls up the persons if it urgently needs their services. One has only to be able to hear the call.
Today we see three public figures on the American political arena - McKein, Clinton and Obama. They have also heard the call.
McKein, of course, personifies America's grave responsibility to proceed with the adopted political policy. Many citizens are well aware of that. In the strict sense of the word, the country is still performing its mission. Is the latter coming to an end? The example of McKein may help us arrive at a conclusion.
Clinton is the incarnation of a certain hope of a light-touch miracle, at least similar to the lucky 8-years presidency of her husband Bill Clinton. Recently Mrs. Clinton made a pun: 'clean-up-after-Bush'. The point is that in due time her husband won a victory over Bush Sn - when there occurred an economic crisis (of short duration, as it turned out later). Today she herself intends to supersede Bush Jr. Hence the aforementioned pun: Clin-ton/after-Bush.     
That's her weak point. I am absolutely sure that she will not be able to win, in principle. All people believe in miracles, but at this point the Americans prefer to be pragmatic. After all, acting in such a way Clinton thus presents her only argument, however it turns out to be a weak one. She will not become a winner, and the whys and wherefores of that lie not at all in the scabrous particulars of life of president Bill Clinton.
Let's look at Obama at last! He has heard the call, he is striving to come into play, and he symbolizes the Americans' deep self-comprehension with regard to the necessity of changes and the search of ways out. He is an African American, so I assert that such a steep turn in perceiving the image of the country's would-be leader means a very important thing: America does not know where to go to. If Obama fails, the start of searching will be postponed. Really!
It is not excluded that Obama may win later. Having seen the outcome, we'll certainly say in that case that America foreknew the way out. It is not so much important to scrutinize Obama's economic bloc (who is there?..). It is more important to look for philosophers. But America is not a self-scrutinizing country. Well, we would like to say that is its weak and at the same time strong point. 
It is granny Europe that looks for ways out all the time and finds them!
And what about us, Kazakhstanis? Whom have we called up?
In the mid- 1990s the authoritative paper Financial Times listed Oraz Dzhandosov amongst 100 most promising politicians of the world. Today we understand that was our hope of quick joining the community of civilized countries and Europe's cherished idea. Today we understand it didn't happen at that time. Will it happen in the future?
Nazarbayev's opposition is a peculiar phenomenon that deserves a retrospective review. How many carpetbaggers wormed their way into it?.. The last of them was Rakhat Aliev. Well, adventurism is our inherent character trait.
But the opposition consisted not only of adventurers! In any case it's a natural right of people to oppose the country's leader. The point is that we adhere to different viewpoints.
Nursultan Nazarbayev personifies the dream of our society. At the beginning of his career I frequently associated his image with Aldar Kose, national hero. The country had indeed called him up to the fore. Today we are looking for economic solutions of our problems, and president Nazarbayev calls up a bloc of economists, Kayrat Kelimbetov and others amongst them.
In response to the appearance of a gap in the administrative system, he calls up Dzhaksybekov to act through the political party. That's an interesting step.  
Nursultan Nazarbayev tries to create a system for raising such new leaders. During all these (long, as many people think) years the method worked, anyway. There were failures on the way, yet successes also took place. The point is that, while advancing in the chosen direction, we ourselves gave birth to the monster of corruption. The fact that it exists everywhere is a weak consolation for us (though the monster feeds us to a certain extent).
In America all is simple. The Americans don't know where to go, yet they are looking for their own obama.
We also don't know where to go, yet all is simple in our country too. The president will be looking (hunting) for his own obama. Good luck!