A day before the November 4 presidential election, six time Republican Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah said that the US would "lose a lot of stature throughout the world" if Barack Obama was elected president.

I immediately wondered: How could any US president lessen his country's global stature any more than what President George Bush did during his eight years of egocentric and arrogant exercise of power?

Most people would agree with Nicholas Kristof, who said that "George Bush's cowboy diplomacy 'defriended' the country and turned a superpower into a rogue state. Instead of isolating North Korea and Iran, he isolated us -and undermined his own ability to achieve his aims (NYT, November D."

Philip Stephens echoed the sentiment of the global community. "What his overseas admirers share is a sense that in choosing Mr. Obama, the US has rediscovered the virtues and values that long underpinned its moral authority. In demonstrating the infinite capacity of the US to reinvent itself by rediscovering idealism, Mr. Obama robs friend and foe of their alibis (Financial Times, November6)."

Among the avalanche of congratulations, a letter from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is singularly noteworthy. He said: "I hope you will be able to take fullest advantage of the opportunity to serve and leave behind a positive legacy by putting the real interest of people as well as equity and justice ahead and above the insatiable demands of a selfish and unworthy minority."

Ahmadinejad's message is refreshingly candid - a first time gesture from an Iranian leader since the breakup of diplomatic relation in 1979 - signaling Iranian desire for some kind of relationship with the US if there are "fundamen-tal and fair" changes from Washington.

In his November 7 press conference, president-elect (PE) Obama said that he would review Ahmadinejad's letter and "respond appropriately." Obviously, he isn't president yet - not until the January 20 inauguration.

However, it's anticipated that the new administration will open a diplomatic interests section in Tehran, in the Swiss embassy -- an

idea already floated by the Bush team. However, no meaningful bilateral relation is forthcoming unless Iran sublimates her nuclear ambition.

All past US presidents took a lot of initiatives to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Millions of Palestinians have suffered for over 60 years for a homeland of their own. They're asking if PE Obama's "hope and change" call will embrace the destitute Palestinians also.

On Iraq and Afghanistan, PE Obama is expected to carefully examine the recommendations of the Centcom commander General David Petraeus. Iraq is expecting that PE Obama will carry through his campaign commitment of US troop withdrawal within a specified time period.

On Afghanistan, General Petraeus is expected to recommend a "surge first," establishing of well defined borders, and then negotiation with the Taliban for a lasting peace.

While the world has congratulated PE Obama, Russian President Dimitry Medvedev and Venezuela's President Hugo Chdvez failed to clutch the significance of the occasion. Within hours of Senator Obama's election victory, Medvedev bypassed the customary diplomatic courtesy of congratulating PE Obama -- and delivered his state of the nation address in which he warned that Russia would deploy short range missiles in its Baltic exclave of Kaliningrad, bordering Poland, to neutralise the antiballistic missile system in Europe. He also announced cancellation of plans to withdraw three intercontinental ballistic missile regiments from western Russia by 2010.

The fons et origo of Russian infuriation is the US plan to deploy a missile defence shield (MDS) in Poland and other Nato member countries encircling Russia. Moscow dismissed President Bush's rationale that the proposed MDS was aimed at rogue states such as Iran.

Medvedev presaged that the era of American supremacy, after the disintegration of the USSR, was over. "The world cannot be ruled from one capital. Those who do not want to understand this will only create new problems for themselves and others."

These bellicose statements, revealing a cold-war mindset, seem opportunistic and cynically manipulative, which may have been directed for domestic consumption to divert attention from Russia's ongoing economic turmoil. Since last July, the Russian

* 'Stock market h^s lost nearly 70% of its value, which is further complicated by a dramatic drop in crude oil prices from July’s S147 per barrel to a 19-month low of S60 a barrel on November 7.

As the price of crude oil continues to slump and foreign capital inflows remain bleak (falling by $50 billion this year, while long-term savings are nearly nonexistent), Moscow's spending spree to keep the economy's wheel running has become a serious concern for economists and businesses, because they feel that the country's cash reserves, ballooned by previously high oil revenues, may soon be exhausted.

Inflation rate is predicted to reach 15% at the year-end, while a majority of Russians still rely on government provided pensions.

Given the dreary economic outlook, should Moscow engage in saber rattling and display cold war mentality — especially when it has very few "precious" friends and is surrounded by unsympathetic former Soviet States, and the global economy is struggling with the ongoing financial imbroglios?

Moscow must not hamstring the incoming US president by threats; instead, it should engage in reconciliation to resolve issues for mutual benefit

As for the US, not too many of us understand why deploying MDS in countries such as Poland, Georgia and Ukraine, while enraging the Russians, is in America's national security interest Besides, the US has many other pressing national and global security concerns to take care of.

Given that America is fighting 'tyvo^vurrtfiflOltaneohsf^^ m Afghanistan and Iraq -- and the economy is sliding daily into a deep recession (September job loss is 240,000 alone, which adds to over 1.2 million job lost since last December; over 6 million Americans are unemployed now; unemployment rate is predicted to rise to 7% by February or even earlier), America must resolve conflicts through dialogue and diplomacy whenever possible.

America's national security and foreign policy goals are not driven by partisan political considerations. PE Obama has already announced that he will form a bipartisan national security team. For example, speculations are that he may ask Defense Secretary Robert Gates - a Bush appointee -- to continue. He is also considering such widely respected Republicans like Senator Richard Lugar or Senator Chuck for Hagel as secretary of state.

To restore its global stature and leadership, Americans want their new president to repudiate unilateralism and name calling such as "axis of evil" and "evil empire’ and so on. America must form alliances for cooperation and friendship -- not to bully sovereign countries with the neo conservatives' ill-conceived doctrine of pre-emptive attack --"bomb first and justify later."

Dr. Abdullah A Dewan is Professor of Economics at Eastern Michigan University