BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Head Shop >

What Role Should the US Play in the World?

  
 
Ethan Hawke
19:28 / 17.09.01
The United States, given its near hegemonic status in the world today (notwithstanding the events of 9/11) seems likely to embark on a much more activist and militaristic course of foreign policy in the months and years to come.

This topic is partly prescriptive; what role would YOU like the United States to play in the future world? Global cop, enforcing Western Values? Intervening to protect its markets and economic interests? Acting abroad only in concert with multinational orgs (NATO, UN)? Isolated from foreign entanglements ("fortress america"?) Anything else or combination thereof?

This topic is also descriptive: Describe the United States's place among the community of nation-states, and how that is likely to change within the coming months. How close is it to the "ideal" you set forth above?

Finally, this topic should also be realistic. What is the best combination between ideals and likely outcomes that can occur in the next few months? For example, is it reasonable to expect the US to seek redress through international bodies rather than unilateral action? Can George W. Bush tone down the cowboy rhetoric and broker a non or minimally violent solution?

Is it possible for a nation-state to pursue a foreign policy that is non-hypocrtical? Are policy goals for a nation state created by ideology or idealism practical or even desirable?

All other issues about the proper behavior of nation states and quasi-national entities can be discussed as well.

I broach this topic because of the many posts on this board and elsewhere that see the events of 9/11 as the bitter fruits of the US's behavior among the community of nations. Can the US reasonably be expected to react differently? Finally, do the policies the US from the constraints of individual situations, overriding principles, personality of the leader, or other factors?
 
 
Jack Fear
09:29 / 18.09.01
The Good Neighbor. We are strong enough, secure enough, to be compassionate: we are rich enough to promote values of peace and freedom around the world (note that these are not specifically American ideals, or even specificallt Western ideals...). If the US had been doing more in an official capacity to provide aid and comfort to the famine-stricken people of Afghanistan, say, then how likely is it that Osama bin Laden would've found safe harbour there to begin with?

The key in such a foreign policy will be to think of the people, the average citizenry first. Our mistake in the Cold War was to back regimes that could keep the commies in line: more often than not, the leaders of those regimes tended to be brutal thugs who oppressed their own people (Saddam Hussein, the Shah of Iran, various African bastards)--and despite vast amounts of American money flowing into these countries, their men-on-the-street developed a great bitterness towards America because not only did they not get any of that money--it was in fact an active instrument of their oppression.

When the strongmen were overthrown or proved troublesome, America's only foreign policy trick was to go punitive, to impose sanctions--further squeezing poor people who'd been getting squeezed by their own, American-backed goivernments for years. No wonder Anti-American sentimnent has hardened. Worse yet, it doesn't even fucking WORK--the people of Iraq starve, while Saddam Hussein buiilds himself a fucking theme park.

American foreign policy should take a tip from the Truman doctrine and the Marshall plan, and, ideally, be less about punishing enemies than about cultivating friends. Isolation only harden resolve: the "rogue nations," the ones breeding bad feelings in their destitution and hopelessness, are exactly the countries we should be engaging with aid packages, trade agreements, assistance and services and interest-free loans.

We are big enough to be magnanimous. Now's the time.
 
 
grant
15:32 / 18.09.01
Word to Jack.
 
 
surblimity
18:59 / 19.09.01
ditto, grant.
 
 
autopilot disengaged
22:17 / 19.09.01
quoteriginally posted by todd:
what role would YOU like the United States to play in the future world?

a strong US, in a stronger UN.
 
 
Ethan Hawke
10:40 / 20.09.01
Doesn't the US supply humanitarian aid to the Taliban in exchange for them wiping out Opium poppies and other drug crops? I'll have to check the web for documentation but I'm 90% sure that it is true.
 
 
MJ-12
11:29 / 20.09.01
The us aid goes to ngo's operating in Afghanistan, rather than to the Taliban directly. http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2001/index.cfm?docid=2928
 
 
Lazlo Woodbine [some call me Laz]
12:11 / 21.09.01
A small one.
The whole country seems to forget about the whole world, until something happens to them.
"I never thought anything else like this could happen. Somewhere else maybe, but not in the US"
A quote from a Brooklyn dweller which was on the news earlier.

After all the help the English give in this 'war', how much can they expect in the removel of the IRA ?
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
13:09 / 21.09.01
Actually, the Clinton administration played quite a major part in the peace process - which is not exactly storming to the finish line, but has improved the situation in N. Ireland. That could be an example of the type of role at which the US could excel: getting people talking rather than fighting.
 
 
000
13:53 / 23.09.01
The US should first learn of understanding the basics of humanity. And remember its not the US but also his allies. You guys seem to forget that what Bush is doing, or at least what he/they are planning will effect our entire planet, not only humans but our nature and animal Kingdom as well.
The US should stop with its pyramid system, nobody is above the other, we are all equal and as such we are one. The roll of leadership can not be, not the way they want it to be and not the way it has been for the last 2000 years.
If the US wants to play preacher by telling the world how it should live, than the words they preach must come from thoughts equality and feelings of unity. What is happening now should NOT be in the hands of the ruling parties, but should come from the hearts of the American people the way they are showing it now.
It should be a service to others State and not a self service State as it has been for the last 400 years+.
The sad thing is that most of you don’t seem to want to know that its not just about Bush and what he wants and demands (how in heavens name could the US people vote for this clown is beyond me) and its not something of today, what you are witnessing started ages ago, and is a battlefield of religions, but sadly they , the US governments made the biggest mistakes in 1947 Rosswell and especially when they decided to make a pact with the wrong aliens.
Then what they thought would not happen as it was predicted ages ago by so many like Nostradamus etc, and because it never came to terms, that what was predicted by one man, has now happened. The Anti-Christ showed his face on the 911, why because : 2000 years ago Christ replied to the question, when will his Kingdom come? That the end of the present age ( the end, that is, of the pagan organisation of the world) would come when the calamities of mankind had increased to the utmost, and when the good news of the Kingdom of God( that is, the possibility of a new system of live free from violence) had been proclaimed throughout the world. ( Matt. xxiv. 3-28.) “of that day and hour knoweth no man, but my father only”(Matt. xxiv. 36) he said. “For it can come at any minute, even when least expected”. ( from Tolstóy ‘the Kingdom of God is Within You)
So he said this 2000 years ago, and they waited and waited, but nothing happened, not in 1999 and no big bang at the turn of the millennium. That is why they waited until the end= after the 7 month of 1999= October to sign the documents, that ushered in the new era Called the New World Order, their dream of total control. Because nothing happened, they got bold and arrogant showing their faces more and more. They taught that they were now safe. And they started to despair the people more and more taking away their future dreams the mass-layoffs were the beginning of what they had planned for us in the next few years. Lowering the incomes by raising the prices of everything, pushing genetic foods that make people sick, condoning violence, scaring the common men etc T
hey thought they were safe. But what happened instead people around the world started to pray in themselves, other people started to hack to get into governmental computers and take out all that has been kept hidden from the people, to show it to the people trough the internet, and because so many people were getting sicker and sicker they started to check the internet, and we all know what happens if you log in, a world of information, for free. So more and more people around the world started to whish for a better world and started to realize that it can be done. The circle of thoughts travelled around the world and when it came to full circle, these thought called for a new beginning and that is when it was time for him to come and
for that what has been predicted to start.
As he said ‘when they least expect it’
The sad thing is, that the people around the western world, have been programmed, to not to believe in the Supernatural or aliens, what you can not see does not exist. By showing you all these movies all that is happening and has happened, has become fiction, while it is this fiction that shows you the truth.
The history of humanity has been filmed from the day they could, they have showed you what they did, how they did, what they are doing and what our future would look like. Lets take The Devils Advocate ( Keanu Reeves All Pacino, by the way Ke-Anu Reeves his name Is Lomax in real live, just as his wife in the movie and his mother in the movie), no way you say, this is all imagination, fiction, for Christ sake it’s the movies.

NO ITS NOT THE MOVIES! Every thing we see is the OPPOSITE of true REALITY.

Before you ask, what role should the US play in the world, you better get to know that world for real, and realize, what role it has been playing in the world since the beginning, and ask yourself, for real, why so many billions have been paid to Israel over these last years? Why no new laws can be made without them consulting the home base, The UNITED KINGDOM. You all have seen his last speech were he was in awe of the UK and Blair(witch) but if you want to know if I am right go and do some research and find out who Speaker Has-tert, minority leader Geb-hardt, majority leader Dash-le and the most dangerous of all Senator LOTT are.

And do not fear, if you feel compassion, you help without asking, you have nothing to fear. Its not the end it’s a new beginning. Humanity will win and they will loose.

[ 23-09-2001: Message edited by: Laila ]
 
 
methylsalicylate
19:51 / 23.09.01
Without doubt some of you will have seen my recent rant on methylsalicylate. This is basically more of the same. Feel free to launch hate mail at the usual address.

I've been back in the States a few days and giving this insane amounts of thought: because this week, the television stations have finally stopped replaying footage of planes hitting buildings and people jumping from windows. Now Crossfire, the Capital Gang and Jane's are moving in with analysis.

I think Bush/Cheney/Powell are handling this admirably, given the circumstances. US policy in Afghanistan, which consisted of arming Muslim rebels after the Soviet assassination of their own puppet leader and ignoring the resulting injustices which arise from giving despots the tools of power, started not with Bush Redux but with Carter. It was exacerbated by Reagan and Thatcher, who gave money, arms and training to the mujahadim. It was further complicated by our fucked up policy in the 'War on Drugs' and is inexorably tied not only to Iraq, Iran and Palestine but also to Poland's Solidarity movement, Vietnam and the enormous and secret budget of the CIA.

Point being, with all eyes on the US and hindsight being 20/20, it's easy to point fingers and say we've made mistakes in a lot of this, which is true. But I cannot escape the feeling that the wheels were set in motion so long ago that even Clinton's somersaults for peace, had they succeeded and not been accompanied by bombing sites in Africa, would not have stopped this. To paraphrase Billy-frickin-Joel, we inherited this mess. We didn't draw the borders. And once people have been steeped in decades of hate they will respect no cease-fire, agree to end no suicide attacks, even if ratified by their leaders. The IRA have proved this again and again.

Which leaves us where? If we attack Afghanistan and such an action successfully removes the Taliban from power there, what will take its place? We will not, could not install a puppet government (that is *sooooo* 80s); Pakistan and Iran are probably salivating at the thought of getting a piece of the remains; we will have given all surrounding countries air bases, planes and weapons in exchange for using their air space (so, you know, start sharpening your pointing fingers when Pakistan tries to take the Kashmir again 3 years from now). The 5% of Afghanistan that the Taliban does not currently control is held by drug kingpins. West Asia, already teetering from a brilliant combination of religious fervor and poor natural resources, will be further destabilised.

But what the hell are the options? Nuclear power, a weensy warhead strictly targeted at bin Laden's homestead? No way, we can only use those toys as a response to a nuclear attack. Assassination of Mullah Mohammed Omar? No again, we have a long-standing policy of no assassinations - which is why Saddam Hussein lives;

embargo of Afghanistan? As if they're not already starving?;

further bombing of Sudan? As if it will change a damn thing?

Point being, this is all so terribly interesting, but I am still and will remain peeved at the folks who wave their arts degrees around from the comfort of a couch in Maida Vale (n.b.: that's not meant as a personal attack, but an example) and whinge that the US has Done The World Wrong. This is a far more complicated issue that minds far finer than our own can barely comprehend. So, the role of the US from now on should be a cautious role, because like Lenny in Of Mice And Men, any small move we make is amplified beyond our intentions.

I must add my praise for Bush (whom I did not vote for) for not turning Afghanistan into glass inside the hour. I hold out hope that our response will be measured and set a better example than previously.
 
  
Add Your Reply