An axis of the US' own making
In his 2002 State of the Union speech, George W Bush declared war on a non-existent "Axis of Evil". This alleged "axis" comprised three countries that either hated each other or had nothing whatsoever to do with one another. It couldn't have been any less of an axis/alliance had the President nominated Azerbaijan, Lesotho and Nauru in place of Iran, Iraq and North Korea.
Yet, by nominating these three countries as a clear and present threat to the US and its interests, and by following that up with the invasion of Iraq in 2003, Bush has managed to create an axis of evil.
Since that 2002 speech, Iran and North Korea have learnt the lesson of the Iraq War ("We'd better get nukes or we're next") and have both set about accelerating their nuclear programs. North Korea recently conducted its first nuclear test and Iran has resolved to defy the United Nations and commence enriching uranium.
This is not an irrational decision by Iran. After all, the Iranian leadership sees itself as having a choice between:
(a) pursuing its nuclear program and facing the damp squib of opprobrium of a hopelessly divided international community (which must settle for the lowest common denominator of quasi-sanctions); and
(b) the possibility of military action - and even regime change (which could mean ending up on YouTube, dangling Saddam-style from the end of a rope).
You can bet that, in Ahmadinejad's position, George W would similarly be on the phone saying, "Better get us some of 'dem 'dere newkewler weapons."
Yet not all the bad news has involved weaponry - or "hard power", as Bush and his realist friends would understand it.
Ahmadinejad is currently touring Latin America, putting together a real axis of US-haters. Already, Iran and Venezuela (led by erratic socialist, Hugo Chavez) have signed a free trade agreement and CNN yesterday reported that Ahmadinejad and Chavez have pledged to spend billions of dollars financing projects at home and abroad to bring about, as Chavez put it, "Death to US imperialism!"
"Iran and Venezuela are next to each other and supporters of each other," Ahmadinejad has said, calling Chavez "a brother and a trench mate". It is impossible to imagine him calling Saddam Hussein anything of the sort.
Chavez, for his part, has promised to "stay by Iran at any time and under any condition" and has even called for a "jihad" on US imperialism.
Now, in his very first week in office, Nicaraguan President and Sandinista Daniel Ortega, is currently hosting Ahmadinejad, who excitedly told reporters,"We have common interests, common enemies and common goals." In response, Ortega declared that "Iran, Nicaragua and Venezuela and other revolutionary countries are together and we will resist together."
To Iran, Venezuela and Nicaragua, you can add Bolivia, Ecuador and arguably Cuba and suddenly the anti-US axis does not consist of three disparate states on the other side of the globe but a growing number of genuine allies, many of whom are in the US' own backyard.
Trench mates, fighting side by side at any time under any condition against a common enemy? Now that sounds like an axis.
Stand by for absolutely no mention of it in next week's State of the Union.
Yet, by nominating these three countries as a clear and present threat to the US and its interests, and by following that up with the invasion of Iraq in 2003, Bush has managed to create an axis of evil.
Since that 2002 speech, Iran and North Korea have learnt the lesson of the Iraq War ("We'd better get nukes or we're next") and have both set about accelerating their nuclear programs. North Korea recently conducted its first nuclear test and Iran has resolved to defy the United Nations and commence enriching uranium.
This is not an irrational decision by Iran. After all, the Iranian leadership sees itself as having a choice between:
(a) pursuing its nuclear program and facing the damp squib of opprobrium of a hopelessly divided international community (which must settle for the lowest common denominator of quasi-sanctions); and
(b) the possibility of military action - and even regime change (which could mean ending up on YouTube, dangling Saddam-style from the end of a rope).
You can bet that, in Ahmadinejad's position, George W would similarly be on the phone saying, "Better get us some of 'dem 'dere newkewler weapons."
Yet not all the bad news has involved weaponry - or "hard power", as Bush and his realist friends would understand it.
Ahmadinejad is currently touring Latin America, putting together a real axis of US-haters. Already, Iran and Venezuela (led by erratic socialist, Hugo Chavez) have signed a free trade agreement and CNN yesterday reported that Ahmadinejad and Chavez have pledged to spend billions of dollars financing projects at home and abroad to bring about, as Chavez put it, "Death to US imperialism!"
"Iran and Venezuela are next to each other and supporters of each other," Ahmadinejad has said, calling Chavez "a brother and a trench mate". It is impossible to imagine him calling Saddam Hussein anything of the sort.
Chavez, for his part, has promised to "stay by Iran at any time and under any condition" and has even called for a "jihad" on US imperialism.
Now, in his very first week in office, Nicaraguan President and Sandinista Daniel Ortega, is currently hosting Ahmadinejad, who excitedly told reporters,"We have common interests, common enemies and common goals." In response, Ortega declared that "Iran, Nicaragua and Venezuela and other revolutionary countries are together and we will resist together."
To Iran, Venezuela and Nicaragua, you can add Bolivia, Ecuador and arguably Cuba and suddenly the anti-US axis does not consist of three disparate states on the other side of the globe but a growing number of genuine allies, many of whom are in the US' own backyard.
Trench mates, fighting side by side at any time under any condition against a common enemy? Now that sounds like an axis.
Stand by for absolutely no mention of it in next week's State of the Union.
Labels: "war on terror", international politics
posted by Ash at 1:36 pm
2 Comments:
For someone who professes to be (a) a journalist and (b) neither left nor right, this is shallow, predictable juvenile-leftie stuff. And, by the way, wrong. First, the comparison of Iran, Iraq and North Korea to Lesotho, Nauru and Azerbaijan seeks to portray Bush's selection of the former as arbitrary and without reason. This is not only dishonest but dumb - is that the sort of 'journalist' you are? The former trio were at the time all dictatorships, the latter are all democracies of a sort. (And in case it had escaped your obvious research limitations, one of the former is now a democracy, thanks to, gee, George Bush.) Second, none of the second trio have records of either brutal suppression of their own populations, or aggression against others; all of the first trio do have such records. I don't recall Losotho kidnapping citizens of other states for its own pleasure; or Nauru using its children as disposable minefield clearance devices; or Azarbaijan threatening, and indeed trying, to wipe another state off the face of the earth. Yet all these are true of the Axis of Evil states. Third, none of your Axis of Nothing in particular ever decided to get into a bingle with the USA, which might kind of explain why Bush didn't pick on them. Anyway, better luck with the flower show or whatever stories they actually let you work on.
Welcome, Dan.
I'm not sure why critics from the right always feel the need to begin a difference of opinion with an attack ad hominem but so be it.
1. I don't profess to be a journalist; I am a journalist. Of course, I don't profess to have any superpowers as a result of that job title. What you choose to infer from it is your business.
2. In one of my initial posts, I said:
"Feel free to read, leave a comment and, most importantly, disagree."
I'm pleased to see you've see you've risen to that challenge, even if it is a reasonably feeble effort from a substance viewpoint.
Your rage at uncovering what you thought was a "juvenile-leftie" seemed to get in the way of reading what I actually wrote.
The only point I was making was making in regards Azerbaijan, Lesotho and Nauru (or substitute any three unrelated countries of your choosing) was simply that they were as much of an "axis" as the three countries the President listed as an "axis" that threatened global security.
There was no "axis of evil".
They may have been nasty each in their own right but an axis involves alliance or co-operation. For all your colour and movement, you haven't said anything that suggests there was any substantial alliance or co-operation.
Post a Comment
<< Home