If there is no oil in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East and Israel is not located near Iraq and Iran, I am sure there will be no noble-sounding claptrap about democratizing Iraq from the US
I don't dispute this. We all know there are dozens of little petty dictatorships in countries with few natural resources and we don't become engaged (and neither do any other major powers on this planet).
But oil IS in our economic interests, both domestically and internationally, because we wish to maintain GLOBAL economic growth (not just our own).
Furthermore, what type of political regime controls the source of that oil, and the tremendous wealth derived from it is in our interests. THE LAST THING we wish to see is for Al Qai'da affiliated agents assuming control over the second largest standing reserves of oil in the Middle East.
And while maybe YOU don't mind a Taliban style regime in charge of that oil wealth, I do...
Furthermore, since the US only imports some 10% of its oil from the Mid-East, it's apparent that we're more concerned about protecting the interests of our allies (Japan) who are prone to being blackmailed by oil producing nations).
If you have, you will have noticed that the colonial powers regarded the Arabs as subhumans and did very little or nothing to help the Arabs embrace democracy
And maybe you'd noticed that it was the enlightened international foreign policy of such presidents as FDR, Truman, and Eisenhower, who pushed for the dismantlement and decolonization of the European empires, including France and Britain.
But the US gets very little credit for having created the conditions where these colonies could achieve statehood.
And while the US has pretty much had a "hands-off" policy with regard to democratization in the Mid-East, hoping not to "rock the boat" too much while we're buying their oil in past decades, the fact that Militant Islamo-Fascism is on the rise in the region has necessitated a drastic change in our policies.
It is my belief that we're seeing a politico-religious reactionarism in these Arabic societies implicitly due to lack of a "marketplace of ideas". The only competition to dictatorial rulership, whether secular or monarchical, is the religious powerbase. Just as the Catholic Church played its role as a rival to European Aristocracy, we're seeing Islamo-Fascism growing in popularity because its the only "idea" that the existing dictatoriships can't erase without tremendous efforts (ie: Turkey's Ataturk).
I suppose you know that in another 35-40 years, according to the projections of Goldman Sachs and kindred folks, the Chinese economy will outstrip that of the US.
Not without opening up their political and economic systems so that they are "acccountable". Face it.. China's not a democracy.. IF ANYTHING, they have transitioned into the classical Fascist state, where the means of private production are subjugated to the will of the state (as determined by the rulers of that government).
And because China's currency is STILL not fully convertible on the international markets, they've sheltered themselves from having to be financially accountable for their economic decisions.
And furthermore, the majority of China's growth is export based. Thus, if the US "catches a cold", it's likely that China will catch Pnemonia.
So yes.. if they can manage to make a political and economic transition, and deal with the tremendous burden of their non-performing debt (estimated at 50%), then maybe 30-40 years from now they will rival the US.
But it is just as possible that they wind up in a civil war between provinces, as the "have nots" in the far-flung provinces, find they're lot is not improving as quickly as the "haves", who live in the trading cities on the coast.
So what's really a "sham", is that you're unwilling to acknowledge the potential for regional, if not world-wide, war should Islamo-Fascist militants be permitted to control the Mid-East oil fields.
Hawk |
