DEMOCRACY » FEATURED » WAR & PEACE
The good empire (Video), analysis
January 5, 2014 · 0 Comments
The USA – An empire or a superpower?!
The path that began from Mayflower
The Mayflower ship departed Plymouth, England, in September 1620 inthe direction of Northern America. The passengers were Puritans (a significant grouping of English Protestants in the 16th and 17th centuries) fleeing religious persecution in Great Britain.
On November 21, the Mayflower reached Northern America (now Massachusetts). The same day the passengers` leaders, William Bruster and William Bradford, signed the Mayflower Compact while the Mayflower was anchored in what is now Provincetown Harbor within the hook at the northern tip of Cape Cod.
The Compact is considered to be the beginning of the process, which saw a small colony become a great empire in less than 300 years. This empire is the United States of America, a superpower with controversial, interesting and impressive history; a superpower, which is unlike other empires…
Renowned American political analyst Zbigniew Brzezinski said in the late 20th century in his “The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives” book that “the Spanish-American War in 1898 was America’s first overseas war of conquest. It thrust American power far into the Pacific, beyond Hawaii to the Philippines” (1, p.3).
Brzezinski notes in his “The Choice: Global Domination or Global Leadership”: “And yet a global capital did emerge, not between Hudson and East rivers, but on the banks of the Potomac. Washington, D.C., it is the first global political capital in the history of the world. Neither Rome nor ancient Peking – both the capitals of regional empires – nor Victorian London (except perhaps in international banking) even came close to matching the concentration of global power and decision making in a few square blocks of downtown Washington” (2).
Brzezinski compares the United States global hegemony to the Freemasons triangle: “A line drawn from the White House to the monumental Capitol building, to the fort-like Pentagon, and then back to the White House encapsulates the triangle of power. Another line from the White House to the World Bank just a few blocks away, to the State Department, and back to the White House (thus also encompassing the International Monetary Fund) and the Organization of American States) demarcates the triangle of global influence.”
And such comparisons are featured in works of many modern political analysts and experts. And why does the U.S, which calls itself the cradle of democracy, a champion of freedom and the center of cooperation, clearly demonstrate and boast of its imperial ambitions? Is the United States an empire or a superpower?
Behind the scenes scenarios of world coups d’état
Historical evidence shows that the United States did not satisfy with the occupation of 1898. William Engdahl, a freelance journalist, historian and economic researcher, and Noam Chomsky, an Institute Professor and Professor (Emeritus) at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, confirm that several U.S. think-tanks developed the concept of America`s new imperial policy. Documents say that the U.S. must not repeat the mistakes of the Great Britain. And what was the Great Britain`s mistake?
The United States` foreign policy, which it embarked on in the late 40s, clearly shows the essence of this mistake – there must be no country that can compete with America on a global scale. The American empire had to be built on a foundation of democracy, freedom, self-determination of nations, and market economy principles (William Engdahl). Initially, this plan covered only the Western hemisphere, but with the collapse of the USSR it spread to the rest of the world. Imperial plans applied mostly to post-Soviet states.
And the essence of Washington`s “global power triangle” lies at the heart of this thesis. It is what the U.S.` policy has been aimed at. In order to achieve its objectives, America resorted to all possible means. Niccolo Machiavelli and Hermann Busenbaum were among those who supported the U.S. such behavior.
But such policy meant restriction of sovereignty of many states, sometimes making them dependent on the U.S. In 1949 Germany became the first victim of this policy. Major-General Gerd-Helmut Komossa, former head of German Military Intelligence, writes in his book “DieDeutscheKarte” (The German Card): “In accordance to a treaty of May 11, 1949, all of Germany’s gold reserves are held in U.S. banks.” America did this to prevent Germany`s becoming a continental power, and continues to hold the country under control.
However, the new imperial concept was put to a major test in Tehran. In 1953, plans emerged to overthrow Iran`s Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh. Former U.S. Department of State employee William Blum says a plan of operation to overthrow the prime minister of Iran was prepared by the U.S. President (4).
Mosaddegh`s “mistake” was that he nationalized American-British oil company BP. Mosaddegh nationalized the company despite warnings from England, and just a couple of months later people took to Tehran streets demanding “resignation to the dictator”. Professor Chomsky says: “There are the same reasons behind all revolutions. The revolution happens when it comes to the equal distribution of wealth.”
And a month after the coup d`etat in Iran, the country`s oil was at the U.S. disposal.
Less than a year later Guatemalan President Jacobo Árbenz Guzmán suffered the Iranian Prime Minister`s fate. And his “mistake” was his intention to nationalize banana plantations. He immediately appeared to be a “dictator” and an “anti-democrat”. Even his Harvard education did not save him, and in 1954 he was overthrown.
This followed by a series of U.S.-organized coups d`etat. Brazil, Greece, Panama, Turkey, Chile… The list is long.
Brazil wanted to be independent in the 60s, and was pursuing a policy aimed at nationalizing its own resources. The Central Intelligence Agency`s (CIA) three-year secret activity in Brazil resulted in a revolution. Chilean leader Salvador Allende was overthrown right after deciding to nationalize large companies in the 70s. In Turkey, CIA organized two coups using discontented military in the second half of the 20th century. And Turkey is still suffering from political, military, social and psychological problems caused by these coups.
Manuel Noriega, who once worked with the Central Intelligence Agency, and then was Panama`s military leader, was overthrown in 1989 when he claimed that the Panama Canal is a state property of Panama. George H. Bush then told journalists that Noriega was a dictator, and that he had to leave so that democracy was established in Panama.
Philip Agee, a living witness of CIA`s activities in 1957-1968, remembers those years: “I joined CIA with enthusiasm. We were carrying out great propaganda in Ecuador. One f the country`s leading journalists, E. Solgado, was working for us. He was putting his signature under CIS-ordered articles, and published them. The goal was to seed fear and confusion in the country” (4). In a short period of time Ecuador turned into a lake of blood, and, naturally, another “dictator” was overthrown. He was eager to nationalize the economy and rid Ecuador`s wealth of US control. And he immediately became a “dictator”, and paid the price.
Agee then goes on to tell of what he did in Uruguay and Mexico (1962-1963). Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia… “Nixon doctrine”, “Carter doctrine”, Reagan doctrine”… “knots” of “a chain process”. “Hot spots”, which are victims of the U.S. imperial ambitions, and “White House documents” behind this… Commenting on this, Blum says: “The U.S. has attempted coups in more than 50 countries in the past 60 countries, in 25 of them it succeeded.” (4).
Search for new “hotspots” and “dictators”
Today foreign policy of the United States has not changed principally…except names of the presidents. And now the target is “Islamic fascism”. The late 20th early 21st centuries marked unrest in Muslim countries. Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Libya, Syria, Egypt… all oil-rich states in the Middle East are being “democratized”. They call it “the Arab spring”. But in reality it is the tragedy of the Arab nations. Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Muammar Gaddafi in Libya, did not want to see their oil in according to a scenario suggested by the United States. And now it`s Iran`s turn. Tehran wants to pursue an independent policy. Raymond McGovern, a CIA officer in 1960-1990, says: “The U.S. invaded Iraq when energy deficit emerged. When a country makes attempts to nationalize its strategic resources, the U.S. starts counter action to return them to its own transnational companies. The U.S. resorts to all possible means, including uprisings, revolutions, coups d`etat” (4).
The U.S. applies different mechanisms of these coup d`etat. They carry out propaganda and sow confusion within a country`s media, government circles, discontented military officers, student associations, national minority groups, etc. Then they, as usual, use terms like “dictator”, “human rights”, “political prisoners”, “ensuring democracy”. Ordinary people get confused with such manipulations, and surrender their country to foreigners. Back to Vietnam events, Nixon declared that Asians must be fought back by Asians.
The collapse of the USSR put former Soviet republics in focus of the U.S. attention. Upon embracing independence, these countries received special overseas orders. These orders were given through “color revolutions”. Georgia, Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan became victims of “color revolutions”. It was clear that the United States considers the post-Soviet republics through the prism of its own interests. The U.S. scenarios of coupes d`etat in the abovementioned countries were applied in former Soviet republics too. The U.S.` goals in Iran in1954, inGuatemala in 1954, then in Panama, Chile and other countries repeated themselves in former-Soviet states. The mechanisms did not differ from those used in the 1950s-1980s. In Georgia, Ukraine, and Kyrgyzstan, angry crowds were ready to smash everything. This saw the killing of innocent people, while confrontation emerged within the society.
And what`s interesting is that these processes were taking place against a background of the deployment of U.S. military in different parts of the world. Currently, the United States has military presence in 600 locations around the globe, mostly in energy-rich regions. Where there are oil and gas, there are American soldiers. This reminds of a spider`s web, which covers the whole world. The U.S. deploys a large military force and conducts local wars in different parts of the world under the cover of democracy. Chalmers Johnson, a consultant for CIA in 1967-1973, admits that “the U.S. is an empire of military bases” (4). Patrick Buchanan, a White House spokesman under President Reagan, says: “We had military bases in more than 100 countries. May be it is not an empire, but it is an exact imitation of the empire” (4).
In 2005, the U.S. deployed 191,000 soldiers abroad. And the total number of the U.S. soldiers in foreign countries is now 1,842,000. The United States` military budget is larger than the total military budget of other world powers. The country has the largest military contingent in the world.
There is one reason behind all the aforementioned events: the U.S. ambitions of taking control of internal and external policy of all countries in the world. In modern language this means empire (5). John Lewis Gaddis, a noted historian, says: “We (the U.S.) are an empire, and even more than that, and we now play a global role in the world.” William Kristol, editor of the political magazine The Weekly Standard, boasts: “If someone claims that we are an empire, this is it – we are a great empire”.
The U.S. has eternal ambitions of dictating global behavior models and defining possible threats. The superpower also considers itself responsible for showing strength and ensuring justice when needed. This makes America`s sovereignty something absolute, while sovereignty of others depends on how much merciful the U.S. will be to them. America is deliberately pursuing an imperial policy aimed at gaining hegemonic control of the world. The Wall Street Journal writes that America must not be afraid of conducting great wars for the sake of interests of “the freedom empire”. This means that the United States is such empire that can kill people for their interests in any part of the world. And this is a superpower`s metamorphosis, which is felt everywhere.
References
- Brzezinski Z. The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives. New York: Basic Books, 1997, 223 pp.
- Brzezinski Z. The Choice: Global Domination or Global Leadership. New York: Basic Books, 2004, 242 pp
- Gerd-Helmut Komossa. Die deutsche Karte: Das verdeckte Spiel der geheimen Dienste. Ein Amtschef des MAD berichtet. Graz: Ares-Verlag, 2007, 216 s.
- Империя добра. Документальный фильм: 2007 год. Авторская программа Константина Семина. Реж. Виолетта Сергеева. URL: http://rutube.ru/tracks/264338.html.
- Уткин А.И. Единственная современная империя – США // Золотой Лев, №77-78. URL: http://www.zlev.ru/77_6.htm.
Video is in Russian language
By myfuamerica
Sorry, comments are closed on this post.