Written Saturday, May 7, 2011 -
Everyone's afraid of our "excessive" celebration with Bin Laden's
death, but the damage is done. You can't crush radicalism with logic,
look at the reaction of Bin Laden's burial at sea. The Islamic faith is
divided on the issue with some approving, some disapproving. With
enough determination and warped logic, you create radicalism. Being
rational isn't in the vocabulary of radicals. You may celebrate death,
but we removed the long standing face of terrorism. What we knew is now
unknown. Those unknown are regarded dangerous with Al Qeida branches
in Yemen, Iraq, etc. That are the dangers in light Bin Laden's death.
What
should be noted is the attack was deep in Pakistan. This is by far the
most important ramification in his death in the near term. I don't know
how much we actually trust the leaders within Pakistan, obviously, it's
not a lot with the raid being conducted without their knowledge. I've
heard that the position of United States secretly opposes a Muslim
country such as Pakistan holding nuclear weapons. Interesting to think
about if drawing parallels with opposition with an Iranian nuclear
program as well as developments within the Gulf states pursuing their
own "civilian" nuclear programs. To a degree, it makes some sense.
The
following is my response to my International Politics class on a pair
of videos of Bill Moyers interviewing Andrew Bacevich, which in my
opinion hits everything I find wrong with America. Simply put, the
problems are within and it's being shown through our foreign policy.
Bill
Moyers' interview with Andrew Bacevich gave insight to what I've long
believed as the problem with America. Bacevich states, "Our foreign
policy is something that is concocted in Washington D.C., but it
reflects the perceptions of our political elite about what we want, we
the people want. And what we want, by and large - I mean, one could
point to many individual exceptions - but, what we want, by and large
is, we want this continuing flow of very cheap consumer goods." This
statement is my perception of our view towards the world, and quite
honestly it's true. Consumerism is the cause of our problem, and it
reflects outward through our foreign policy. There's a lot of problems
internally with America; however, we're all too engrossed with the fear
of terrorism and things happening outside of the United States to care
about things at home. The massive consumption of raw resources,
including oil helps us continue to keep the flow of goods going, quickly
and cheap.
One must ask the question why Americans see
our problems are outside of this country as Bacevich points out, "many
Americans to think that the problems we face are problems that are out
there somewhere, beyond our borders. And that if we can fix those
problems, then we'll be able to continue the American way of life as it
has long existed. I think it's fundamentally wrong. Our major
problems are at home." Further into the interview, Bacevich points out
to the "American way of life". He points to what he values most in
the American way of life in the following:
"Well, I think
the clearest statement of what I value is found in the preamble to
the Constitution. There is nothing in the preamble to the
Constitution which defines the purpose of the United States of America
as remaking the world in our image, which I view as a fool's errand...
I believe that the framers of the Constitution were primarily
concerned with focusing on the way we live here, the way we order our
affairs. To try to ensure that as individuals, we can have an
opportunity to pursue our, perhaps, differing definitions of freedom,
but also so that, as a community, we could live together in some kind
of harmony. And that future generations would also be able to share
in those same opportunities."
I feel it's a slight
generalization; however, it's true to some degree outside of our
consumerist nature, as I would argue would be higher value at this
point. You know, stamping our "democracy" throughout the world is
disgusting to me these days. This is because I realize what American
democracy is... and what others in the rest of the world fighting
against the West also see. They see American democracy is really
cutthroat politics, selfish capitalism, and undying consumerism. Yes,
their are glimpses of genuine democracy in America; however, they can
see through the thin veil in front. There is little stability in our
law and economics. Nearly everything is on political whim and what laws
we do pass is for what we want and not what we need. We are killing
ourselves from within.
At this point, with the recent
death of Osama Bin Laden, our consumerist nature is overpowering, like a
powerful drug on this country that for the most part we're too late.
If you can recall about a year ago about $1 trillion dollars worth of
raw resources was discovered in the Afghanistan. The New York Times
reported, "In 2004, American geologists, sent to Afghanistan as part of a
broader reconstruction effort, stumbled across an intriguing series
of old charts and data at the library of the Afghan Geological Survey
in Kabul that hinted at major mineral deposits in the country. They
soon learned that the data had been collected by Soviet mining experts
during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s, but cast
aside when the Soviets withdrew in 1989." (New York Times). So as far
back as the Soviet invasion, there was research for an economic
viability to their war, and to the recent past, some 7 years ago,
renewed interest to see what Afghanistan had for resources. The USGS
reported significant findings of iron and copper, colbalt, gold, and
lithium. A Pentagon memo reported, "states that Afghanistan could
become the “Saudi Arabia of lithium." (New York Times). I don't put
much faith in change for America, mainly since the "green" revolution
is a lie. Electric cars use lithium and most lithium resources are
outside of the US, and in essence, we're just going to be trading one
resource for another.
I like Bacevich in pointing out the
ignorance of the American public toward our internal affairs and how
our government has changed to a very powerful "imperial presidency".
"
Well, and the - I think the troubling part is, because of this
preoccupation with, fascination with, the presidency, the President has
become what we have instead of genuine politics. Instead of genuine
democracy. We look to the President, to the next President. You
know, we know that the current President's a failure and a disappoint -
we look to the next President to fix things. And, of course, as long
as we have this expectation that the next President is going to fix
things then, of course, that lifts all responsibility from me to fix
things. One of the real problems with the imperial presidency, I
think, is that it has hollowed out our politics. And, in many
respects, has made our democracy a false one. We're going through the
motions of a democratic political system. But the fabric of
democracy, I think, really has worn very thin."
We are
engrossed with politics, blaming the current President for failure and
divesting our consequences to the responsibilities for the next
President. In what world does this work in? I've never found that
personally. He discusses how bad power has invaded our government and
the public so apathetic, "The Congress, especially with regard to
matters related to national security policy, has thrust power and
authority to the executive branch. We have created an imperial
presidency. The congress no longer is able to articulate a vision of
what is the common good. The Congress exists primarily to ensure the
reelection of members of Congress." You could argue that the War
Powers Resolution was a part of that. However, he's correct for that
last part about ensuring continuous flow of power for Congressmembers.
Bacevich
isn't just critical to our government, but to the general public as
well. He points out the sacrifices the public made during World War II;
however during the Second Gulf War, "The President said just two weeks
or so after 9/11, "Go to Disney World. Go shopping." Well, there's
something out of whack here, if indeed the Global War on Terror, and
Iraq as a subset of the Global War on Terror is said to be so
critically important, on the one hand. And on the other hand, when
the country basically goes about its business, as if, really, there
were no War on Terror, and no war in Iraq ongoing at all." Everything
goes on, this simply doesn't make sense. One can see why he's angry
about those supporting the troops, since probably people lack
understanding about sacrifice.
"There are many people who
say they support the troops, and they really mean it. But when it
comes, really, down to understanding what does it mean to support the
troops? It needs to mean more than putting a sticker on the back of
your car.I don't think we actually support the troops. We the people.
What we the people do is we contract out the business of national
security to approximately 0.5 percent of the population. About a
million and a half people that are on active duty. And then we really
turn away. We don't want to look when they go back for two or three
or four or five combat tours. That's not supporting the troops.
That's an abdication of civic responsibility. And I do think it -
there's something fundamentally immoral about that."
Sacrifice
the American way... impossible. Our economic, infrastructure,
transportation, city planning, trade, everything you can think about
America would not exist with the current policy. Honestly, if we
changed, we would have to fundimentally change over 50% of how we do
things. Restructure city planning that is suburban-centric to
city-centric, forget about fast shipping, increase costs for things that
come from the outside of home region, etc. As I said, Osama Bin Laden
changes nothing about our policy toward the Afghanistan/Pakistan
region. Actually, this puts thing into a more dangerous position,
especially with Pakistan.
References:
Bacevich, Andrew. 2008.Bill Moyers’ interview with Andrew Bacevich. PBS. Informed Comment Retrieved May 6, 2011. http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08152008/profile.html
Risen, James. 2010. U.S. Identifies Vast Mineral Riches in Afghanistan. New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/world/asia/14minerals.html?pagewanted=1
No comments:
Post a Comment