Debates are important for the candidates but not everything in American elections. ÊIt only helps to decide the mind of the swing voters sitting on the fences till last moment. Media and money are the twin gods of American elections. Election may be over before the debates are. ÊIn next few weeks senator Kerry would have to be more convincing than critical for a serious bid to the Whitehouse on November 2.

Most of the 90 minutes debate was on war and Homeland Security. ÊThe president was the forerunner in the presidential race, but clearly was the underdog in the debate as he had to answer more on war in Iraq after he pronounced, 'mission is accomplished' but still to find the elusive Bin laden, three years after invasion of Afghanistan.

Both maneuvered shrewdly and spoke well. But after the debate the President would have difficulty in persuading the undecided voters. ÊHis facial anatomy was less than normal and expression lacked the warmth of conviction. ÊWhile John Kerry had a face more fitting to a combatant, his years of experience in the Senate had given him a lucid and persuasive style of talking. The only point he did not sell well was acceptance of his mistake of supporting the war on Iraq while trying to make the president guilty of waging it. ÊThat might be a subtle maneuver to get away by accusing the president as greater evil for faulty judgment. The president did try to deliver a solid punch on this; projected Senator Kerry as inconsistent leader but with little visible impact. ÊThe president looked neither a great debater nor a visionary leader. ÊHe was bodily uncomfortable and somewhat restless, lacked piercing words and delivery. ÊThe debate is not likely to go in favour of the President.

John Kerry on the other hand was careful, trying to be persuasive without breaking away from the president's war on terror and invasion of Iraq. ÊHe chose words rather than commitments, committed only where Bush had already committed. ÊAs an underdog trailing ten percentage points behind Bush, he chose pealing the president rather than killing in one go, tried to be more civil and decent while delivering the shot to the point of impact, emphasizing the difference of style. ÊWhere was the difference in foreign policy goals really? ÊTax rebate for the rich and affluent was the only area of difference between the two, which did not fare well in the debate.

Few more weeks of campaign and two more debates to go, Senator Kerry's manoeuvers looked more like for D Day than today. ÊHe should be aware that he lacks money muscles for prime time TV ad. ÊThe onslaught of last minute TV commercials might have a shadow on his credentials and push the incumbent President beyond debate.

President Bush's woes were not due to his invading Iraq or Afghanistan but failing to carry the allies with him; more so due to his failure to deliver the promised victories. ÊThe contenders for the Whitehouse were unflinchingly committed to war against terrorism and success in Iraq. ÊThe difference between the two leaders was in words and style -some diplomatic manoeuvers to convince European allies and another UN resolution etc, not on the central issue of invading Iraq and timeframe for withdrawal. ÊIt was not the moral issue of occupation without a reasonable provocation but loss of profitable business in Saddam Iraq on which the European trade houses were unhappy.

For the rest of the world it was a demonstration of American resolve that whoever should be the next president, the US policy would remain consistent on major national goals - they would fight terrorism to a satisfactory end and tighten homeland security. ÊAs long as war on terror continued Muslims would have more embarrassing constraints in entering and living in the United States. ÊPost 9/11 war on terror has swallowed two shanty Muslim states.

If Kerry had his priority on nuclear proliferation, Iran would be in greater trouble. But it would not be the last name on the list. ÊIf Iranian enrichment plant was rolled back under pressure or destroyed in the style of Iraq's nuclear facilities in '81, who would be next? ÊI suppose Pakistan should seriously address that question. ÊAnd for Bangladesh the hard reality is, it does not really matter whoever is the President of the USA. ÊWe are half a globe away, not merely by physical distance but by the consequences too. ÊWe are yet to discover the difference between Monmohan Singh and his predecessor Bajpayee, despite the sudden outburst of Foreign Minister Morshed Khan on accumulated frustration of years.

All his political life, since entering senatorial race from Massachusetts State decades ago, Senator Kerry was known as great underdog fighter. The way he had outdone Governor Hayward Dean and others towards securing the Democratic presidential nomination, coming from behind, he would be a formidable candidate, despite the latest pollster predictions. ÊIf John Kerry could use the two more debates and four more weeks to his advantage, George Bush might as well have to follow the tradition of one term President like his father.