Powered By Blogger

Monday, January 31, 2011

Two years to clean the foreign policy stables out



Perhaps, everyone may recollect the Obamania that spread over Europe, Asia and Africa during his election campaign in the USA. Europe perceived Obama to be new reincarnation of John F. Kennedy — young, elegant, free-thinking adherent of liberal democracy. Asia and Africa were joyous because of the color of his skin. Whatever the motivation, expectation of a wonder that literally was hanging in the air, unified all Obamaniacs. Miracle, however, didn’t happen. Why is that?
Analyzing the policy of current American democratic administration we should always keep in mind that it is conducted under constant stiff pressure of its eternal opponents — Republicans and the governments of U.S. allies. The latter have their own views regarding the favorable behavior of their Trans-Atlantic “Big Brother” — each of them is to serve the interests of these allies even if it contradicts the goals of other American friends, who are mostly grouped within NATO or simply bound together by the shared aims and targets.

Despite that pressure, Obama managed to overcome two main problems of American foreign policy — its neo-con ideology and submission to the corporate interests. If we try to analyze the main directions of Obama’s foreign policy and give it marks for efficiency, this analysis would probably look like this:

1.      Closure of the Guantanamo prison, limitation of military tribunal authority in regard of “Islamist terrorists”, ban on tortures and elimination of CIA secret prisons all over the world.
That was a principal issue in Barack Obama’s campaign. Being a professional lawyer, he was unable to pass right along the glaring violations of the U.S. Constitution and international legislation, which his predecessor cranked out. Achievements of the 44th U.S. President in that direction are not very impressive. “Gitmo” prison — as the Guantanamo Detention Center is often called in America — continues its inglorious existence. It turned out that even having the supreme power it can’t be simply disbanded. The USA offered large amounts of money to the countries, willing to “host” the Gitmo prisoners, but the number of those who agreed to make an easy buck this way still didn’t match the number of prisoners. Obama, however, managed to withdraw the cases of “terrorists” detained at the Liberty Island out of the military tribunal authority. Yet he failed to solve the matter of this concentration camp completely. Kidnappings of people from around the world have seemingly stopped and there were no news about tortures recently; episode with the secret CIA prisons set America at loggerheads with its main ally, European Union, but still…the situation didn’t move an inch forwards. Then there was a story with the CIA operatives, who have kidnapped a German citizen of Arabic origin, tortured him for several years and then literally left him naked at the beach. Decision of the FRG court that put those operatives on a wanted-list didn’t particularly contribute to the U.S. prestige in the world as well. Dick Cheney’s legacy turned out to be above the bend even for the new President of a superpower.

 2.      Withdrawal of American troops out of Iraq.
Not everything is smooth here, too. According to the plan, “merely” 50.000 of military advisers were to be left in Iraq. Obama tried really hard to keep his campaign promises even despite the complicated situation in the country. But the pulled-out troops were being replaced with an all increasing contingent of the so-called Private Security Contractors. This is nothing but the private version of American Army armed every bit as well as the regular troops — they remind the notorious Blackwater, also known as Dick Cheney’s private army. Due to different estimates, U.S. Central Command alone disposes 96.000 of such “security guards”. Besides that, nearly 20.000 of private foreign soldiers are engaged in the warfare in Iraq — they guard the infrastructural objects, according to their contracts with Iraqi Ministry of Defense. They form the full-fledged military compartments that have their own tanks, armored vehicles and even the combat helicopters. Still, permanent intestine between Sunni and Shiite Arabs at the background of international conflicts leave no place for hopes to establish Iraqi democracy in the foreseeable historical prospect.

3.      New Afghani strategy.
During his pre-election campaign Obama laid the special stress on erroneous policy of George W. Bush, who made Iraq the direction of decisive attack, while elusive bin Lades was hiding at the Afghani caves, where he guides his diabolical network from. Logical consequence of these speculations was moving the centre of American military efforts from Iraq to Afghanistan.
That country however turned out to be a much tougher case even than the rebellious Iraq. Having increased military pressure upon Talibs, Americans faced not just their building-up resistance but also the virtual betrayal of their closest allies in this war — Pakistan, and paradoxically as it may seem, Hamid Karzai, whom Americans have single-handedly granted the President’s seat. Pakistan — which illegally owns nuclear weapon and is still ruled by the top brass, despite the cosmetic changes in the state leadership — has demonstrated outrageous disregard of American interests, having changed it with poorly disguised Muslim solidarity  with bellicose Talibs. This relationship is being nourished by the corruption ties of the Pakistani generals with Afghani drug-trafficking underground, which makes up the foundation of Talibs’ financial prosperity. Things became ridiculous: Americans pay Talibs contribution for letting the military cargo caravans through their territories. Of course, it’s not done that straightforwardly but rather via numerous mediators, but still most part of this money settles in the pocket of main U.S. adversary in Afghanistan. Drugs are the blood of corrupted Afghani quasi-economics and no one manages to stay clean of it there. Karzai’s government — including the province governors — is involved in the trafficking of Afghani heroin and corrupted head and ears. Add here the aggravated relationship between the USA and its NATO allies, who make up the backbone of Afghani coalition forces. Most of them simply can’t bear the burden of war against terrorism anymore — they face fierce domestic opposition, unwilling to accept relentless casualties and financial losses (especially in the era of world economic crisis). Afghanistan has already cost political careers to such devoted allies of the United States as Tony Blaire and Alexander Kwaśniewski. Their wistful example is not particularly inspiring for the rest of NATO members. It is coming to the point when the USA might be left alone — except for its loyal Georgia, of course — against Talibs. Experts and analysts become more and more convinced that lost war in Afghanistan would be the end of NATO. Be as it may, but the mightiest military organization in the world losing the war to a bunch of fanatics and drug leaders can hardly expect to save its dignity and influence.  

4 comments:

  1. On torture: PFC Bradley Manning is being tortured while imprisoned at Quantico, Virginia, USA. Having been charged with leaking the following video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgybOzCQIpM&feature=related,
    he's also being tortured to coerce him to admit he was responsible for the first Wikileaks dump, thus connecting Julian Assange to him. Article 10 of the military's Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) requires a prisoner be brought to a speedy trial. In violation of US and international law (Geneva Conventions), he's being tortured. This is not "change we can believe in." Under public pressure the military announced today (1-31-11) it will review PFC Manning's treatment and announce its conclusions next week.

    On war, here is an interview of interest with Daniel Ellsberg who leaked The Pentagon Papers (Watergate):
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgB7YJG4xfk.

    And here are links to articles of interest regarding al Queda, Taliban, Pakistan, and Afghanistan:

    http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2002/06/05/memo

    http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KG14Df01.html

    http://www.counterpunch.org/brzezinski.html

    Earl

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for such a substantial comment.
    I've looked through your links with a great interest. I've especially enjoyed the interview with Daniel Ellsberg and also found an article regarding Al-Qaeda's awareness about American-Taliban talks quite informative.

    As for the interview with Brzezinski — it's quite interesting that you've brought this up. You see, nearly a year and a half ago I've writtern two articles about Afghanistan, where I reviewed the entire situation in this country from the geopolitical point of view. And by doing so, I was unable to avoid the Brzezinski's concept of Great Chessboard. I've also used parts of that very same interview in the second part of my article (http://www.win.ru/en/school/3074.phtml). If you're interested in the subject, please feel free to share your thoughts — rare thing brings me more joy than a conversation with a clever interlocutor.

    P.S. In case you're interested, here's the first part of the article as well — http://www.win.ru/en/school/3073.phtml

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks for your kind words, G. Tinsky. I'll access the first part of the article within the next fews days.

    Earl

    ReplyDelete
  4. George, I tried posting a response but don't think it took--browser was acting up. This is my second attempt to say thank you for your kind words and letting me know the information posted above proved helpful.

    I've copied the links to your other articles...will read them soon.

    Earl

    ReplyDelete