|
CounterPunch
February
18, 2003
Political Fundamentalism in
DC
Will Bush Prevail
or Listen and Think?
by JAN OBERG
Will the Bush regime "prevail" and go
to war? Or will it listen to citizens--and quite a few governments--around
the world and think?
Could it be that President Bush is projecting
his own subconscious and fears when he tells Saddam that "the
game is over"? Could it be that he and the apparently desperate
people around him are beginning to feel that their bullying and
vision-less game--not with the world but against it--could spell
the end of their regime and the U.S. empire?
Political
fundamentalism
The Bush regime is politically fundamentalist:
we are right, they are wrong. It's based on the flawed assumption
that policies can be based on: a) dictating to friends and foes
alike that they are either with us/U.S. or against us/U.S., and
b) ignoring every type of listening, consulting and consensus-building
policies with rightfully concerned parties, including its closest
friends.
So, regrettable as it is, it's the Bush
regime's policies, not Saddam Hussein's, that have split the
West and now shake institutions such as the United Nations, the
EU and NATO.
We are not talking about events and statements
made the last few weeks. Citizens in virtually all Western democracies,
in the Arab world and elsewhere, as well as a growing number
of governments, have accumulated their anger and fears over several
years.
The overwhelming protests by millions
of citizens all over our common world on February 15 draws upon
a deep-seated resentment and a sense of having been humiliated
by those in power. They feel that they have had enough after
years of the Bush regime's insensitivity, arrogance and bellicosity.
The destructiveness
of the Bush regime
Here are some of the unilaterally destructive
results of the Bush regime's activities.
1. Mistaking the criminal act on September
11 for a war. Then building up a world-wide war on terror that
is out of proportion with the problem and will cause more, not
less, terrorism. (In the year 2000, about 400 people were killed
world wide in terrorism--many lives, yes, but not exactly the
largest problem in the world).
2. Ignoring civil rights in the U.S.
and elsewhere (Guantanamo) in the struggle against this terrorism.
More Orwellian legislation is being prepared by Attorney General
John Ashcroft: Patriot Act II.
3. Undermining international law by withdrawing
from important treaties, fundamental principles and norms of
the UN Charter and refusing to participate in summits where the
common problems of humankind are being discussed (often problems
caused predominantly by the American lifestyle and consumption
patterns). These policies are associated with fundamentally important
issues such as the Kyoto treaty, The International Criminal Court,
ICC, the Johannesburg World Summit and the decision to stop funding
the UN Population Fund as well as with outmaneouvring heads or
international organisations and missions.
4. Forgetting to consult, after September
11, with the sincerely sympathetic Europeans, ignoring NATO--that
evoked its Article 5--and attacking Afghanistan virtually alone.
5. Devastating Afghanistan and killing
5,000-10,000 innocent people in this country with a population
of about one-tenth that of the U.S. In short, retaliating completely
out of proportion to the harm done on September 11 (and they're
still bombing).
6. Bombing Afghanistan and contributing
far too little to minimum humanitarian and economic aid. And
then rushing on to Iraq and Korea (and Saudi-Arabia, Iran, and...?)
7. Talking about the "Axis of Evil"
which is based on a simplified and paranoid worldview that provides
the U.S. a role similar to that of the Messiah and the Chosen
People--chosen to cleanse the world from that Evil.
8. Antagonising the Koreans, north and
south, dismissing the "sunshine policy" and ignoring
the commitments made in the 1994 agreement with North Korea.
9. Promoting the expansion of NATO and
then undermining it because the Allies will not blindly and obediently
accept that a member state is used in a U.S. attack. Turkey,
against the will of 90 per cent of its citizens, is being blackmailed
to serve a military springboard for attacking Iraq and thereby
could draw the whole alliance into the disaster.
10. Antagonising both Russia, India and
China on a variety of issues and thereby potentially moving towards
a new Cold War.
11. Introducing a nuclear posture, a
Ballistic Missile Defence and a pre-emptive war-fighting strategy.
The Bush regime refuses to see that this amounts to blatant violations
of international law and common norms laboriously built up and
solidified over five decades. These strategies also effectively
prevents the United States from providing moral leadership towards
a more peaceful world.
12. In the process, creating jitters
throughout the world economy and causing the dollar to decline
steadily, while oil prices are going the other way. Just imagine
what much higher oil prices will mean for millions of people
in poor oil-importing countries.
13. Putting thousands of American lives
at risk: a) by sending soldiers into combat and b) by steadily
increasing the risk of future, retaliative terror attacks on
the U.S.
14. Planning a nuclear war on the Iraqis,
something only a callous and irresponsible person would do to
further his own interests. In addition, ignoring completely that,
according to UN Security Council Resolution 687 of 1991, the
Middle East shall be a zone free of Weapons of Mass Destruction
and that, therefore, Israel is obliged to be inspected, comply,
co-operate and be disarmed like Iraq.
15. Undermining the United Nations and
creating the conditions for a deep split in its Security Council
by exclusively imposing its own will on the world organisation
.
16. For all practical purposes conducting
a political war on "old" Europe and the European Union
(which admittedly has made a joke of its idea about a common
EU foreign and security policy). The U.S. will punish Germany
in particular for its "treachery" (See the Guardian)
17. Creating a huge democratic deficit
within the West: a) George W. Bush, the world's most powerful
leader, was not elected, he was selected. b) according to opinion
polls the majority of citizens world-wide are against a war while
a number of "democratic" governments support the war.
The Bush regime has been so amateurish that it has never thought
of a political exit strategy, should the war option turn out
to be unacceptable or infeasible
18. Developing an empire that is not
built on vision, benevolence or economic strength but on military
power (half of the world's military expenditures), economic exploitation
of millions around the world, megalomania, arrogance and plain
contempt of virtually everybody else who are not "with us."
There is nothing constructive about the
Bush regime; it's a political and civilisational destroyer. When
did you last meet someone who thought George W. Bush was a man
with a rational policy or an attractive vision of the future
world? Many felt that about, say, Kennedy, Carter, or Reagan.
Today people around the world shake their heads in resignation
or feel that George W. Bush, his clique and attitudes, begin
to look like a serious danger to the world. This is not anti-Americanism.
But it is anti-Bushism. And we do need non-violent confrontation.
Intellectual
and moral power versus military might--a deadly imbalance
Never has the gap between intellectual
and moral power, and technological and military power been so
deep. There is nothing to laugh about anymore, if there ever
was.
Extrapolate the kinds of thinking, policies
and trends above into the future--2, 5, 10 years. Do you think
it can go well? How long will it take before the international
community, as we know it, breaks down in chaos and, perhaps,
world wide warfare? How much longer can the real problems of
humankind wait for solutions while the Bush regime wastes the
world's resources, derails our attention and consumes our energies
on foolish struggles against imagined and self-contrived enemies?
Mr. Bush' game must come to an end before
we all slide into incurable decay. He is far more dangerous to
the international community than Saddam Hussein. They are both
political fundamentalists but only Bush seems to have the mind-set,
the (weak) intellect and the mighty military power to plunge
the world into uncharted territories of utter chaos and destruction.
Perhaps the best we can hope for at this
juncture is some kind of damage limitation. What is needed, however,
in a world order perspective is free, non-commercial and internationally
monitored elections leading to peaceful regime change in Washington.
U.S. democratisation
through world participation
Given the extent of the American empire
in today's world, we must also begin to think imaginatively about
ways in which citizens around the world, not only the American
people, can influence the election of future U.S. leaders and
the course of its global policies. February 15 may be one indicator
of something new: those influenced by U.S. power voice their
democratic opinion to influence U.S. policies.
Global democratisation should go through
non-violent confrontation with the Bush regime and co-operation
with every American who is half as scared as the rest of us are.
February 15, 2003, was the largest ever global, pre-war protest
and it was a great sign of hope for humanity and decency.
Masters of
(Nuclear) War are hardly deterred by a few million marchers...
But we must not be content now. The struggle
for a peaceful resolution to the Iraqi and other threatening
conflicts, not to mention the abolition of war as an accepted
social institution, requires a sustained peace debate and activism
in the weeks, months and years to come. We should not take for
granted that Masters of War who do not seem afraid to shake the
fate of the earth with their nuclear weapons, would be deterred
to the point of backing down just because a few million people
protest.
Jan Oberg
is director of Transnational
Foundation for Peace and Future Research based in Lund, Sweden.
Translation from Swedish by Jean-Francois
Drolet.
Yesterday's
Features
CounterPunch News Service
Slow
Lerner: It May Not Help Kids in Iraq, But It Sure Got Michael
Lerner Airtime
Andrew Murray
Tony
Blair Versus the British People
Ben Tripp
President
A**hole
Peggy Thomson
My
Close Encounter with Saddam
Gary Leupp
Meet Mr. Blowback:
Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, CIA Op and Homicidal Thug
Saul Landau
Bush and Corporate Fraud
Adam Engel
A Civilian Occupation:
The Politics of Israeli Architecture
Anthony Gancarski
Jacksonville in Crisis
Rick Giombetti
Specific Threats to Democracy
Jean-David Levitte
A Warning on Iraq from France:
Make War the Last Option
Ian Gurney
Whose Side is Bush On?
Maria Engqvist
Did
the FARC Shoot Down a US Military Plane in Colombia?
Ron Jacobs
This Madness Must Cease
Josh Frank
Call to Washington:
Stonewall Bush
Website of the Day
Rock
Out Against War
Keep CounterPunch Alive:
Make
a Tax-Deductible Donation Today Online!
home / subscribe
/ about us / books
/ archives / search
/ links /
CounterPunch Available Exclusively
to Subscribers:
- CounterPunch Special:
The Persecution of Gershon Legman by Susan Davis: Smut, the Post Office, Commies
and the FBI;
- Reeling Democrats: Is Pelosi the Answer?
- Gandhi v. Hitler: the Secret Race for the Nobel
Prize;
- Sullying Mario Savio's
Memory;
- Lynching Then and Now;
- Earn While You Learn: Chris Whittle and Child Labor;
The Case of the Pompous
Professor;
- The Class Struggle in
Boston: All that
Effort, But What Did They Get?
Remember, the CounterPunch website is
supported exclusively by subscribers to our newsletter. Our worldwide
web audience is soaring , with about seven million hits a month
now. This is inspiring, but the work involved also compels us
to remind you more urgently than ever to subscribe and/or make
a (tax deductible) donation if you can afford it. If you find our site useful please: Subscribe
Now!
Or Call Toll Free 1 800 840 3683
home / subscribe
/ about us
/ books
/ archives
/ search
/ links
/
|