American Setback.
Ahmed Hany
October 22, 2008
The mortgage crisis in the US is the tip of the ice bag. The credit card crisis is coming as many stopped paying for what they bought. Another crisis is still on the ways, which are students´ debts to banks. In the US, students could receive loans from banks to spend on their education. Now that employment is in its highest level, many economists expect that these debts will contribute to the already deteriorating situation.
This economic situation and the difficult military situation in Afghanistan and Iraq will affect the ability of the US to lead. The security situation in Iraq is fragile. A British General in Afghanistan warned against high expectation of victory. General David Petreus the Central Commandship Commander asked his administration to negotiate with its enemies. News told that the Saudis mediate between Taliban and the Afghani government. The Iraqi Premier Al-Malky declared that the Americans gave some concessions about the date of withdrawal, they agreed to leave Iraq by the end of 2011, and their troops will be stationed out of Iraqi cities by mid 2009.
Reluctance of allies to continue in Afghanistan made the US rethink its wars. The Canadian Prime Minister said that he regretted his support for the US to occupy Iraq. The French President Sarkozy said that NATO would not stay in Afghanistan forever.
The economic crisis and the military inability to conclude victory came at a time when Russia is rising steadily and the US failed to formulate a united EU front to confront Russia. President Sarkozy said that President Medevedv kept his promise and withdrew his forces from Georgia although the Russian army is still in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. The French President said also that the international security depends upon the relationship between EU and Russia.
President Medevedv said that the US lost its credibility as the world´s leader. He calls for a new international order. He wants to formulate a new European Security Treaty and he wants Canada, US and other international bodies to share in the treaty. He complained that the UN Secretary General asked the NATO to do the UN job in keeping peace.
Moreover, Russia took serious steps towards responding to the US trials to encircle Russia by consolidating its military relations with Latin America. Russia wants to change the international monetary system and both the Russian and the French presidents think that the US lost its entity as a monetary superpower.
President Medevedv took another step to confront the US. He agreed with the Byelorussian President to unite their air defence forces. Uniting such forces needs high level of military coordination. The pro-West alliance in Ukraine fell down and its parliamentary elections may mark the return of Russian influence to East Europe if Pro-Russia group won. There are active Russian trials to revive the Commonwealth of Independent Countries to control Central Asia.
Russia still guards its steps in the Middle East as it agreed to Olmart´s request and it declared that it would not sell S-300 missiles to Iran. However, the Russian navy uses the Syrian Port Tartus. Most probably Russia will activate its role in the Middle East after November Peace conference to follow up Annapolis. Most probably, this conference will be held in Egypt. After this conference, Russia should prepare for the Moscow Peace Conference in the first quarter of the next year.
Then the American strategic dilemma came from its military and economic bad achievements with its inability to have the main European forces united at a time that marks the rising of Russia. How could the US go out of this dilemma?
When a strategy fails, there are two ways to continue. The first is to reduce targets. The second is to expand more aggressively. Many determinants will reshape the American strategy.
The first and most important is what is best for the economy. While reducing targets allows saving money and resetting priorities, expanding aggressively means more arms sales and supplies for the forces. It is known that governments spend on wars; however, the producers may have a good opportunity to reform their business. The army could absorb unemployment. If the strategic circles in the US took the decision of expanding the empire more, the American infrastructure would survive while the American contractors would find postwar business abroad. All these revive economy and save the dollar.
The second determinant is the strategic thinking of the new American administration. If McCain won, it would be just an extension of the present strategic thinking of provoking wars to achieve targets. Obama might change the method to achieve targets and he might reduce the militarization of external policy. Yet both think that Afghanistan is an important front. The new American President will not be able to declare a new war without a prior approval from the Congress. This gives the strategic centers and the intelligence a wide room for maneuvers and for manipulating representatives.
There are signs that the US strategy is the same but it will be less aggressive. In other words, the US will continue to try to achieve its targets of controlling resources and to lead the world. The US declared that it might remove North Korea from the black list of evil axis although the Asian country resumed its nuclear activity and test fired long-range rockets. There are controversial messages to Russia. They tell Russians that the US wants to avoid a new Cold War. The American Diplomatic circles did not respond aggressively to the EU officials who doubted the US ability to lead or to continue as a monetary superpower, against their nature especially during Bush´s era. The American Foreign Ministry did not object to trials to negotiate with Taliban.
The only sign of provoking a superpower or a regional power is supplying Taiwan with 6 billions dollars arms that consolidate its ability of defence against China. China responded by canceling an American arms sale and freezing the American-Chinese military cooperation. This means that the Americans move the front line Eastwards.
Whatsoever happened, the US will not be the only global force in the near future. Most probably, its trial to expand further will not meet success unless it gives larger roles for EU and Russia. It should consider regional powers in Latin America and Middle East. A stubborn aggressive expansionism will expose the US to the risk of losing more.
What is the effect of this new strategy on the Middle East? Let it be the next article.
This economic situation and the difficult military situation in Afghanistan and Iraq will affect the ability of the US to lead. The security situation in Iraq is fragile. A British General in Afghanistan warned against high expectation of victory. General David Petreus the Central Commandship Commander asked his administration to negotiate with its enemies. News told that the Saudis mediate between Taliban and the Afghani government. The Iraqi Premier Al-Malky declared that the Americans gave some concessions about the date of withdrawal, they agreed to leave Iraq by the end of 2011, and their troops will be stationed out of Iraqi cities by mid 2009.
Reluctance of allies to continue in Afghanistan made the US rethink its wars. The Canadian Prime Minister said that he regretted his support for the US to occupy Iraq. The French President Sarkozy said that NATO would not stay in Afghanistan forever.
The economic crisis and the military inability to conclude victory came at a time when Russia is rising steadily and the US failed to formulate a united EU front to confront Russia. President Sarkozy said that President Medevedv kept his promise and withdrew his forces from Georgia although the Russian army is still in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. The French President said also that the international security depends upon the relationship between EU and Russia.
President Medevedv said that the US lost its credibility as the world´s leader. He calls for a new international order. He wants to formulate a new European Security Treaty and he wants Canada, US and other international bodies to share in the treaty. He complained that the UN Secretary General asked the NATO to do the UN job in keeping peace.
Moreover, Russia took serious steps towards responding to the US trials to encircle Russia by consolidating its military relations with Latin America. Russia wants to change the international monetary system and both the Russian and the French presidents think that the US lost its entity as a monetary superpower.
President Medevedv took another step to confront the US. He agreed with the Byelorussian President to unite their air defence forces. Uniting such forces needs high level of military coordination. The pro-West alliance in Ukraine fell down and its parliamentary elections may mark the return of Russian influence to East Europe if Pro-Russia group won. There are active Russian trials to revive the Commonwealth of Independent Countries to control Central Asia.
Russia still guards its steps in the Middle East as it agreed to Olmart´s request and it declared that it would not sell S-300 missiles to Iran. However, the Russian navy uses the Syrian Port Tartus. Most probably Russia will activate its role in the Middle East after November Peace conference to follow up Annapolis. Most probably, this conference will be held in Egypt. After this conference, Russia should prepare for the Moscow Peace Conference in the first quarter of the next year.
Then the American strategic dilemma came from its military and economic bad achievements with its inability to have the main European forces united at a time that marks the rising of Russia. How could the US go out of this dilemma?
When a strategy fails, there are two ways to continue. The first is to reduce targets. The second is to expand more aggressively. Many determinants will reshape the American strategy.
The first and most important is what is best for the economy. While reducing targets allows saving money and resetting priorities, expanding aggressively means more arms sales and supplies for the forces. It is known that governments spend on wars; however, the producers may have a good opportunity to reform their business. The army could absorb unemployment. If the strategic circles in the US took the decision of expanding the empire more, the American infrastructure would survive while the American contractors would find postwar business abroad. All these revive economy and save the dollar.
The second determinant is the strategic thinking of the new American administration. If McCain won, it would be just an extension of the present strategic thinking of provoking wars to achieve targets. Obama might change the method to achieve targets and he might reduce the militarization of external policy. Yet both think that Afghanistan is an important front. The new American President will not be able to declare a new war without a prior approval from the Congress. This gives the strategic centers and the intelligence a wide room for maneuvers and for manipulating representatives.
There are signs that the US strategy is the same but it will be less aggressive. In other words, the US will continue to try to achieve its targets of controlling resources and to lead the world. The US declared that it might remove North Korea from the black list of evil axis although the Asian country resumed its nuclear activity and test fired long-range rockets. There are controversial messages to Russia. They tell Russians that the US wants to avoid a new Cold War. The American Diplomatic circles did not respond aggressively to the EU officials who doubted the US ability to lead or to continue as a monetary superpower, against their nature especially during Bush´s era. The American Foreign Ministry did not object to trials to negotiate with Taliban.
The only sign of provoking a superpower or a regional power is supplying Taiwan with 6 billions dollars arms that consolidate its ability of defence against China. China responded by canceling an American arms sale and freezing the American-Chinese military cooperation. This means that the Americans move the front line Eastwards.
Whatsoever happened, the US will not be the only global force in the near future. Most probably, its trial to expand further will not meet success unless it gives larger roles for EU and Russia. It should consider regional powers in Latin America and Middle East. A stubborn aggressive expansionism will expose the US to the risk of losing more.
What is the effect of this new strategy on the Middle East? Let it be the next article.
Print
Email
