THE near-extermination of the indigenous Indian population by the settlers, the dehumanising slave trade, the wars of independence and the civil war all have combined to define the American psyche and political conduct, especially on the foreign policy front.
Although in terms of geography the US seems to be one of the safest countries in the world, politically the country looks very insecure and it thus goes around the world either to win friends by using both carrot and stick or fighting those who are not interested in its system. And September 11 2001 must have added fuel to an already raging fire.But many people try to explain the US foreign policy solely in terms of the oil issue, which in my view is a one-dimensional view of looking at it. In fact all countries need oil, whether they are small or big. The point of the matter is that US is the heir to a system that the European powers tried to put in place since the 18th century, which is global capitalism. So, in a sense America sees its mission as making the world safe for capitalism but at the same time ensuring its own primacy within that capitalist orbit. So, even the other big European powers like England, Germany and France have been co-opted into that agenda, albeit reluctantly.Thus most countries in the world today have to accommodate American forces in one form or the other on their soil. Or create what is usually referred to as the ‘local cop on the beat’, meaning that the host or satellite states do the dirty work for the Americans on the ground, but with the command structure deciding everything from Washington.The so-called war on terror is a classic case in point – Pakistan, for example, is a new addition to fighting ‘terror’. But it is an elaborate system that stretches from Western Europe, the Middle East, East Asia and now also Africa (American soldiers stationed in Botswana for example). But, unfortunately, not everyone is prepared to turn their countries into backyards for American forces and the American way of life. Thus countries like Venezuela, Iran and North Korea are the targets of American hegemonic warfare.South America, the Middle East and East Asia are no strangers to the USA wrath and intolerance to governments which would stand in the way of its hegemony. If it doesn’t support client regimes it would usually employ economic sanctions to cripple or bring down non-compliant governments. North Korea is one country which has been targeted over the years to bring it down while propping up South Korea with economic resources and military support. The latest target is now Iran where the West has imposed economic sanctions, of course, at the behest of America.What crimes have these three countries committed? In the case of Venezuela the issue has been revolving around Hugo Chavez’s policies of trying to reverse the wheels of capitalist exploitation by nationalising oil multi-nationals and foreign banks. That gradual turn to the left and redistributive politics being champion by Chavez and the Bolivarian political ‘revolution’ didn’t go down well with the American views of how they would like to see the global economy controlled.With North Korea and Iran it is the familiar story: the nuclear weapons programmes which these countries are said to be developing or have developed. The two countries have always maintained that their nuclear programmes are for peaceful purposes but America and the usually hesitant West will not buy into that and hence the sanctions and economic blockade like the US has been doing in the case of Cuba for its socialist policies.Here, I’m in full agreement with the Namibian government in opposing economic sanctions on Iran. At the recently concluded Non-Align Movement 16th Summit, held in Iran, our Foreign Minister, Utoni Nujoma, said that Namibia condemns the illegal unilateral economic embargo imposed on Cuba and the economic sanctions on Zimbabwe and Iran by the West. I would add North Korea to this list too. Personally, I’m not a greater believer in globalisation especially the way it is presently being conceptualised, which is the perspective from which our Foreign Minister Nujoma is approaching it – that is free or unfettered trade. I see economic blockade and sanctions as crimes against humanity because usually the poor suffer most.President Woodrow Wilson once noted that the USA was involved in a struggle to ‘command the economic fortunes of the world’. No wonder it is worried about the shifting global balance in the means of violence of which it is the leading power; but more importantly, overly concerned about losing the edge on how to control the global economy, as some countries are not prepared to be used as either military or economic backyards of America. That is the perspective from which the current hostility against Iran and North Korea, and to a lesser degree against Venezuela, must be understood.
