***At the end of a bitter impeachment hearing, the Americans may have to settle for a politically hurt and weakened presidency that cannot act with initiative and dexterity. He will lose his credibility as a leader who can deliver.***

WITH an impeachment inquiry hanging over the White House. Bill Clinton’s presidency is reeling under the Monica Lewinsky scandal that has sent shock waves throughout America, also around the world capitals. For me this is the second catastrophic presidential crisis to watch ana read about, the first one being the Watergate climax, when I was relatively new in America. Still. I remember watching angry President Richard Nixon, exclaiming, "I am not a crook!1' I have that sultry summer day in 1974 very much in my mind when Nixon, already resigned from the presidency in disgrace, was boarding the helicopter in the White House lawn, and leaving the most exalted position in his life, for good. I was visiting an upstate New York campus offering a summer workshop. My wife, my children and myself were invited to a barbecue at the residence of a friend, also a political science faculty at the University there.

We were glued to the TV watching the high drama of American politics when my host, though a registered Democrat. also felt sorry by the sight of a Republican president leaving in shame, and, in a reflective mood, asked me: "Rashid, how do you feel about the whole development? Will it destabilize the American form of government. forever? You are not an American, do you have a different perspective?” 1 was never an avid student of American politics, but I knew what was happening, mostly media driven, not necessarily most objective. I did not think it would permanently injure the future American politics, but it would possibly weaken the presidency at least for a while. That's what 1 told my friend. Nearly two decades have elapsed since then, and Clinton may face the same fate, as that of Nixon, but my thought on the longstanding sustainability of the American machinery ol

government has changed little. The coming weeks, possibly months will be grueling for the president, and the American political precincts will be topsy-turvy, but it will not dramatically destabilize the U.S. political system itself.

Between the presidential and parliamentary forms of democracy. my personal preference is for the later depending on the circumstances, and I am aware of the negatives of the American presidency that can be aggravated by the congressional gridlock. Walter Lippman, the journalist, writer and a political confidant of several presidents once said that the American system was like a two-volume novel where the hero and heroine got married in the first part, and in the second volume they got a divorce! In a way. it's very much true. The president can propose, but the Congress will dispose. Often, it's an antagonistic relationship since the power of the president is largely determined by his moral capacity to persuade the legislative branch. The American political history could be fantasized as a tug of war between the president and the Congress: sometimes the president wins, and sometimes the Congress prevails. The presidential power has been on the downward slope since 1974, and the current sexual scandal, mostly catalyzed by the independent counsel Kenneth Starr, and whatever comes out of it. may further escalate the slide.

The wheel of American history will possibly turn against the executive branch for a number of reasons:

When the founding fathers put together the U.S. Constitution. they did not anticipate the enormous power of the media that can keep on "exposing” the

government leaders' wrongdoing evidently for a better governance but also for sensationalism. and better ratings that bring the industry more advertisement revenue. The power of investigative Journalism immortalized reporters like Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward during the Watergate Investigation. and the media assault on public officials continues with the growing advancement of the electronic media.

Any president, however successful. could be challenged on the fuzzy grounds of moral imperfections including the private life. Tlie growing Christian Right, for example, has drawn its political battle plan against Clinton to remove him from office on grounds of his alleged perjury and failure in personal morality. Some Clinton backers even hinted that Kenneth Starr himself was also a believer in the moral orthodoxy cherished by the religious right in America. According to the published opinion polls. 21 per cent of the Americans expected their president to be a moral leader. Such religious/moral proclivities are likely to gain further ascendancy in the American political life, and observers sniff polarization in the air.

The old doctrine of executive privilege has been dwindling, and the future presidential aides will think twice before carrying out such responsibilities that would have any potential for controversies and inquest. Beyond the gripping tale of Clinton-Monica sexual escapade. Kenneth Starr's relentless inquisition will haunt the White House for many years to come.

Numerous observers conclude that the Congress is now more partisan than ever before

and the old buckle of give and take that links the executive and legislative branches will be weaker in the future. The events and circumstances (e.g. the Civil War, the Great Depression, the World War II. the Cold War) that generally make the Congress yield its power to the president no longer exist presently. Economic prosperity and international peace are not the good times for the American presidency to rise!

The White House crisis really put America at the crossroads of history between an inquisitorial Congress and a hounding media on the one hand, and the American public on the other. As of this writing, the opinion polls indicated .that majority of the Americans, distraught they may be. did not want Clinton to resign or be impeached. Well-orchestrated volleys of the Starr Report, coming in waves, and with the pornographic details, did not. so far. shift the quantum of public support for letting Clinton complete his term in office Even those who want him to go argue that the impeachment pro< cchire will be divisive while many burning questions are knocking at the door. Indications are available that Clinton. while fighting for his political life, could not give his fullest attention to the business of the state Recently, he postponed his trip to South Asia where he was expected to take initiative for halting nuclear proliferation there. Events in the Middle East, the Serb massacres in Kosovo, and the feared economic meltdown, to mention the Important ones, deserve Immediate presidential attention. Any Intensification of those looming crises on the horizon may invoke a fresh resurgence of the presidential

power. There are born-again skeptics about the congressional ability to lead the nation, in place of the president.

Impeachment is uncharted water In American politics, and nobody is certain whether Clinton can be readily removed from office unless he opts for a resignation on his own. The entire American political process may be entangled in the legal hair splitting and semantics of what Is an impeachable offense and what constitutes a sexual engagement. Indeed, impeachment in America is both a legal process and a political question. Politically, the House of Representative could go ahead with the Impeachment charges since the Republicans held the majority there, but that will be of no avail in the Senate unless » the Democrats join the Republicans to constitute the two-thirds majority for the removal of President Clinton through impeachment.

At the end of a bitter impeachment hearing, the Americans may have to settle for a politically hurt and weakened presidency that cannot act with initiative and dexterity. He will lose his credibility as a leader who can deliver. Considering all the distractions that will be dawn upon the nation, many people are suggesting a possible deal that will include a legislative censure of President Clinton. short of a removal by impeachment. In his New York Times article. October 4. 1998. former President Gerald R Ford, recommended Congressional rebukes lor Clinton to avoid the spec Ire of impeachment.

Notwithstanding Clinton's calamity, few would doubt the underlying solidity of the American political system that survived over 200 years. During

the Watergate crisis, the Iran-Contra scandal and occasional legislative-executive deadlocks, both during Reagan and Clinton's presidencies. 1 have heard a few despairing over their checks and balances that promote more conflict than accommodation. but most Americans love their form of government. The viability of a political contrivance depends on the succession procedure, and the American presidential succession mechanism, well defined as it is. has stood the test of time and crises. We have seen the American institutional resilience when President Kennedy was assassinated, and when Richard Nixon was forced to resign in order to avoid a painful impeachment.

Finally, a weakened presidency does not necessarily indicate an institutional collapse for the United States. Two recent American presidencies represented by Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter respectively were viewed by many as weak. By no means, they marked the "end of history" for the American institutional arrangement. 1 don't see any unusual tension in the civil society. I was in Washington. D.C. recently, two days after the Starr Report that pulverized the whole nation, but there were no troop movements there! Nor did I see any military tank patrolling the streets! It's an indication that the Americans could sail through a political crisis without using the military means. Except a few minor scuffles between the pro-Clin-ton and anti-Clinton protagonists in one or two cities. I have not heard of individuals and groups shooting at each other over what the president did or didn't. The Americans are allowing the Congress and the constitutional stipulations to go through the motion. TTiat's pretty instructive for other nations struggling to establish their own democratic process.

The author writes from Glassboro. New Jersey. USA