A role of the USA in the world politics
It is impossible to discuss a
future role of the United States of America in the world without understanding
the global processes that have been taken place in the world over the last
several years. September 11, without doubt, was a break point event in these
processes. First, it showed people a danger of an international terrorism.
Second, the event brought about a confrontation between two different
viewpoints on the development of world politics. On the one hand, politicians
from many countries believe that any active actions to preserve world order
must be organized only by United Nations. On the other hand, the United States
is pushing forward its aggressive unilateral policy that is based only on
Washington’s (sometimes biased) understanding of the current international
situation.
This US strategy was clearly
demonstrated in Iraq. Now, after two and a half years of the war, the question
must be asked if this policy achieved its goals. Did it bring a peace and
stabilization in the post Sadam country? Yes, the military operation itself was
a success. Actually, it was difficult to imagine any other result of that war
considering that the conflict was between a mighty US and Iraq, a third level
military power. Despite the military successes, this strategy did not produce
desirable results. The USA cannot stabilize the situation, and the Iraqis
continue to organize attacks against the US and coalition forces.
May be the USA had another
reason to start the war? Some people (in Russia, anyway) believe that a real
goal of US policy in the Middle East is to take under control a so-called the
world’s hydrocarbon ellipse. It is obvious, that a power controlling that
region would become a master of the world in this century. Now, the USA is in
much less favorable economical position than some other countries (potential
America’s enemies). So, the US efforts to extend its influence over that area
are an attempt to liquidate this imbalance once and for all.
But this goal could hardly be
achieved by military means. If the USA decided to occupy some other states in
that area, they would surely face a guerrilla resistance, like in Iraq and
Afganistan. History proved that the only way to suppress insurgency is a policy
of mass terror, and I doubt that America will ever use it. The attempts to
organize puppet democratic governments will fail too. Such regimes will be
hated by the general population and overthrown as soon as US army leaves the
country.
By the way, why did Bush’s
administration decide to occupy a sovereign country to fight international
terrorism? What is the connection between an organized group of criminals and
an independent state? Why not occupy Italy to fight the Italian Mafia?
I think that a Washington’s
current unilateral policy is useless and even dangerous. It is increased a
general instability in the World. Iraq became a place that attracts terrorism
from all over the globe. The wave of anti-Americanism grew up in the world,
even in Western Europe, a traditional ally of the United States. The danger of
a terrorist attack on the territory of the United States is even higher than
itwas before the Iraq war. It seems that the only purpose of US actions is to
remain the world’s single superpower by any means.
I believe that the USA will
not be able to continue its unilateral policy anymore because it goes against
objective processes in the world economy and international relations. First of
these processes is globalization that does make the world more and more
interconnected and interdependent place. Another factor is a steady development
of a multipolar world. I doubt that China would joint a unipolar structure and
be obedient to US decisions. The EU would become another world’s center of
power. The political regimes in European countries are very close to American,
so any military confrontations are very unlikely at this point. But an
economical competition would be intense. I would say that the other war,
between the euro and the dollar, is already on, and the dollar is loosing so
far.
There is another potential
threat to the USA. Only a few years ago, a dollar was almost equivalent to
gold. People and businesses all over the world tried to keep their savings in
dollars. A huge amount of American currency was accumulated in foreign
countries. Now, when a dollar is getting cheaper, many try to get rid of it and
buy euros. What would happen if all this dollar cash came back to the USA?
India, Japan, and Russia will probably also try to make their influence on the
world politics comparable with their economical potential.
Also, it is possible that
the USA will return to the policy of partial isolationism to concentrate on its
own problems. First, US troops should be withdrawn from Iraq. This action will
greatly destabilize the situation in the Middle East, and Iraq, probably, will
become a new center of Islamic fundamentalism. Islamic radicals will increase
their activity and the situation will become very dangerous for many countries,
but not for the USA. The terrorists simply could not reach the United States.
It will be a real danger for the EU and Russia, American adversaries. In Russia
the war could spread from Chechnya to the whole Caucasus region. In European
countries the danger of terrorist acts would increase dramatically. Of course
it would be terrible act (an immediate withdrawing of the troops) from a moral
point of view, but the States have already shown several times that they care
only about their own interests.
Money and troops released
after the war would be used to protect borders. The threat of terrorist attack
using a weapon of mass distraction is real, and the open boarders are the
easiest way to get in the States. Boarders should be guarded not by overweight
volunteers gathering around an American flag, but by elite troops. Some funds
would be used to improve security services; I think they need more informers.
The terrorists can strike only from inside of the United States. That is why
the only way to fight them is to put everything in order in your own
country.
In conclusion, no one can say
how the world will look like even in the nearest future; we can only predict.
One thing is clear, however, the future of the country directly depends on
today’s policy.
|