بیشترتوضیحاتافزودن یادداشت جدید 3- The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. The end of the Cold War, which occurred with the collapse of the Soviet Union, was without any doubt a great development and turning point in international relations. Transformation and redistribution of power, collapse of the previous power balance, increasing confusion in the global situation, great advances in technology and communications, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, a decline in energy sources and reserves, reemergence of extremist nationalism in some countries, a notable lack of success by international organizations specially the United Nations to administer and uphold some form of justice and rule of law or help nations or governments recover usurped rights, emergence of Islamic movements and uprisings inspired by the Islamic Revolution in Iran, recurring US military interventions in various countries, and the collapse of the bipolar world system are some of the important characteristics of international relations at this juncture. During this period, the first political doctrine put forward by the US elites was the theory of a unipolar world order, which was quickly adopted by both Ronald Reagan and the elder George Bush.[vi] This theory fundamentally rests on the basis that with the collapse of the bipolar world system and disintegration of the Soviet Union as the Eastern superpower, the United States, as the remaining superpower must continue "its mission of leading the world in a unipolar world." They even envision and assign different roles to various countries, much akin to an international class [caste] system for the entire world. This theory of a unipolar world power order was experienced for only a very brief period during the Persian Gulf war and occupation of Kuwait by Iraq. The US leadership used this strategic blunder of Iraqi rulers to put a unipolar world order into practice and succeeded in dragging along most countries in its implementation of such a policy, but it did not take long for world's major powers to disobey and disregard the rules of such a system; and a subsequent wave of opposition proved its unpopularity and impracticability and even American thinkers admitted to its temporary and short life span. Another doctrine that was first discussed in the early 1970s, and was widely advertised all over the world because of the sharp increase in the use of the Internet and satellites during this decade, was the theory of globalization. The basis of this theory was that because of the revolution in the field of communications technology, political and geographical boundaries will lose their importance and will gradually disappear altogether. They theorized that all of our world's nations will grow so close together as to resemble a "global village," where Western culture, politics, and economics will rule the day and the country which dominates in these fields will naturally and eventually emerge as the ruler and master. Up until the events of September 11, 2001 this theory was propagated and advertised in various ways and dimensions. It was even put into practice in the arena of world economy with the creation of the General Agreement of Tariffs and Trade (GATT), and its successor, the World Trade Organization (WTO). Of course, there were many instances of popular opposition to such organizations, and these grew parallel and [alongside the formation of the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs [GATT] and WTO] as they grew and became global. The protests were especially noteworthy in many Western countries and the United States itself. And yet a third theory holds that the United States, as a superpower, can only maintain its position if it sets and declares a mission and calling for itself and select a clear and determined goal for the top of its agenda which can win support from the global community. In other words, were world peace suddenly to break out and an atmosphere of lacuna of a common threat prevails, then no member of the international community would have any incentive to give its seal of approval to a unique, superpower status for the US, nor accept, approve, formally recognize, or be coerced into recognizing such status for the United States. The events of September 11 and the lack of success of the globalization theory in practice led to the wide acceptance of the third theory. The fact that George W. Bush, in his first reaction to the tragedy of September 11 says: "We have begun another crusade," and with the CNN choosing its main coverage logo as "America at War," and "War Against Terror," all prove that American policymakers are trying to put the third doctrine into practice. Alas, in spite of the fact that many global issues can be solved peacefully, they have set their eye on another path and their deeds and decisions seem to point toward a policy of maximum use of the events in pushing the policy of war and militarism. This in turn, further arouses suspicions that the American intelligence services themselves were involved and that 9/11 was then used as a pretext for the subsequent policies. [This could be the reason why US leaders reacted to this incident as though they had some previous knowledge of its occurrence. The US president immediately declared war and pointed his finger and threats at the world of Islam, quickly naming Osama bin-Laden and his Al Qaeda network as the perpetrators, Bush declared that "we also must face supporters of terrorism as well." The noteworthy point here is that Bush administration listed as supporters of terrorism countries and organizations with which it had had some previous problem, and with the declaration that "either countries are with us or with the terrorists," it began a serious effort to recruit others for a broad coalition to support its warlike policies in the name of fighting terrorism. In his next step, Bush grouped Iran, Iraq, and North Korea together as the "axis of evil" and as though that baseless accusation did not suffice, his administration announced the possibility of a nuclear attack on seven specific countries![vii] Thus, although the victims of the 9/11 tragedy were primarily common Americans and citizens of various other countries, the real "winner" of the human tragedy was chiefly an extremist political faction in America, i.e., US leaders with close ties with the military establishment a faction which currently virtually controls all three branches of the government in the United States. The Republican Party, which has come to symbolize the rightist [extremist] and militarist wing in the United States, was for years contemplating a series of social, political, and economic plans which they wished to carry out and never had succeeded when they encountered vehement resistance by American and world public opinion. The events of September 11 provided them with the best opportunity to suddenly gain the people's support for their plans and policies with almost unprecedented ease and become able to put them into practice whenever feasible. 3- The Economic Background[viii] In the 11 months preceding September 11, 2001, industrial production, which provides the vital economic backbone of the United States, had seen a non-stop decline. "Consumer confidence," one of the most important of all economic indices determining and predicting the level of consumer confidence in the economy in order to purchase consumer goods saw also a year-long continuous fall in its annual index in the year before September 2001. Growth in the US Gross Domestic Product (GDP), envisaged at 2.5% barely made it to 2%, and the unemployment level in the few months preceding September 11 rose from 3.9% to almost 5 percent, fueling fears among economists that another recession was imminent. Another important factor terrifying US economic planners was the fact that for the first time in past 60 years all world regions (with the notable exception of China) were struggling with very low growth, recession, or even deep economic crises. In other words, not only most Asian, African, and Latin American countries were experiencing very deep crises in their economies, but word's second largest economy, i.e., Japan, seemed economically incurable after 11 continuous years of near recession growth rates or outright recessions. Conditions prevailing during the new economic recession caused many of the long-hidden truths about the real status of US economic system and its economy to be revealed. It is well known fact now that America is immensely burdened with the mind-boggling sum of $30 trillion in debt, making it the largest debtor nation in the history of the planet and red ink keeps growing at the rate of $1.25 billion per day. In addition to a dismal economy, the US is also facing an energy crisis. In order to address gasoline price hike not seen since 1970s in the United States, George W. Bush put forward a plan, which calls for increases both in [domestic] energy production and the level of protection accorded to the environment. The plan also envisions more oil, coal, and nuclear energy production and calls for construction of some 1,300 new power plants. If we take no action, America will face more blackouts, and if we continue to procrastinate, America will become ever more dependent on imported oil," Bush warned in his speech pushing the energy plan. This, in light of the fact that both George W. Bush and his vice president Dick Chenny favored taking giant and very risky steps in assuring the rising energy supplies for the United States, and this policy has caused the Republican Bush administration face serious opposition from the Democrats and environmental groups. At the same time Democrats sitting in the House of Representatives asked the Bush administration to exert pressure on OPEC member states so that somehow gasoline prices in the US began coming down and also suggested tapping the US strategic oil reserves whenever necessary. A Reuters' report from Washington pointed out the bigger bite which gas prices have begun to take out of American household budget, it went on to say that this had coincided with the warm season in California where blackouts occur on a regular basis and these have helped push energy to the top of both political parties' agenda. Considering the fact that Bush receives major political and financial support from the US energy industry, he is expected to pay more attention to boosting oil, natural gas, and coal production in America. This policy contradicts sharply with those of the House Democrats, consumer advocacy groups, and environmentalists who prefer more efforts to conserve energy. Therefore, another important challenge the US faces is the energy crisis, which will encourage American policymakers to plan and pursue hegemonic policies. The world produces some 76 million barrels of crude oil per day and the United States, with only 5 percent of world population, consumes about 20 million barrels per day (bpd), which is some 26 percent of total world oil production. Also, the US oil consumption is three times its own production. Moreover, during the past half a century, US oil reserves have fallen and the current domestic production can only provide 30 percent of its energy requirements. The same holds true for natural gas, where the US reserves are declining and imports gas has also been rising. As a matter of fact, in the three decades after 1970 the Unites States has never been faced with such a level of energy shortage. If no solution is found to this energy crisis, US prosperity and national security will be threatened and will perhaps force Americans to change their wasteful ways. Thus, the blaring and insane reaction of the US leaders to the 9/11 incident can be seen in this economic context. We can also peruse the economic history of major capitalist countries specially the Unites States during the Twentieth century and observe the fundamental role war plays in these countries as a powerful cure for recessions and economic crises.
لطفا منتظر باشید ...
