The recent news that two Russian Tupolev Tu-160 strategic bombers landed at Venezuela’s Libertador military airfield and “will spend several days carrying out training flights over neutral waters, after which they will return to the base,” signals, in my mind, the beginning of the second phase of the cold war. As we argued here,...
Read more »
Far East
Cold War Part Two is here
Crisis and Contradictions in American Intelligentsia
For quite some time now, I have often found myself asking the question “Why does the greatest country in the world keep making stupid political blunders in terms of foreign policy?”. The evidence of this myopic and sometimes disastrous political miscalculations are broad and varied: from starting local wars in the Far East to...
Read more »
The hunt for oil: Another wasteful $1 Billion foreign aid
The recent news that once again the Bush administration plans to announce a $1 billion package of aid to help rebuild another country, this time, Georgia after its rout by Russian forces last month, is yet again a demonstration that the Bush administration is clueless about the use of economic power in foreign affairs....
Read more »
The rebirth of a Bipolar world?
In a sign that the world may be witnessing the re-emergence of a bipolar world where the United States and most Western countries are on one side and Russia and its allies are on the other, President Dmitri Medvedev of Russia on Sunday laid out what he said would become his government’s guiding principles of foreign policy after its landmark conflict with Georgia – notably including a claim to a “privileged” sphere of influence in the world.
Why John McCain cannot be president
I strongly believe that the country will be in another war a few weeks after Senator John McCain is sworn into office, should he win the election in November. That war will be with Iran, and perhaps, by extension, Russia even if between now and then, the Iranian regime finds a way to assuage the fears about its nuclear ambitions.
The Georgia/Russian crisis and Realpolitik
The recent flareup between the Republic of Georgia and Russia has yet again brought up the issue of how far powerful nations will go to protect what they perceive as their national interest. As much as the United States can cry foul over the supposedly heavy-handed response Russia exercised over the ill-advised military incursion by Georgia into the breakaway territories of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, it (the U.S.) paved the way for the Russian government to engage in this blatant disregard for international norm and political decorum.
Contradictions and Crisis of Failed States
The International Relations community has focused its attention in recent times on the growing cost of food and its impact on developing nations and the devastating effect the rising cost of food will have on the world’s poor which is currently estimated to be over one billion people. On top of this, most poor countries are perpetually weak political entities and are often ravaged by internecine wars predicated on the struggle to control vital natural resources and land.
The fallacy of the Bush Doctrine
The political pronouncements of U.S. President George W. Bush following the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center have collectively come to be known as “The Bush Doctrine”. These foreign policy principles were anchored on the declaration that the United States of America had the right to treat “hostile” nations, particularly those suspected of “harboring or giving aid” to terrorist groups as terrorists. The “doctrine” also encompasses the notion of preventive war which stipulates that the United States has the right to depose or remove foreign governments that were perceived as threats to the national security of the country. A further explanation from the text of the National Security Strategy of the United States (2002) and the president posits that the U.S. would adopt a policy of “supporting democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny” globally as part of the Global War On Terror, and overt unilateralism which the President described as “pre-emptive, unilateral military force when and where it (the U.S) chooses”.
What in the world is Hamid Karzai smoking?
I almost fell out of my chair the other day upon hearing the news that Afghan President Hamid Karzai was threatening to take the fight to Pakistan if they (Pakistan) did not stop supporting the border-crossing Taliban insurgents. What is he smoking? Or better yet, maybe he should ease up a little on the opium. Here is a guy who almost got killed a few weeks ago in his own parade. Here is a leader who cannot even summon enough troops to fight the Taliban without NATO forces. Here is a president that cannot walk the streets of his own country. Is this the same Afghanistan where the Taliban recently stormed a prison and released over a thousand prisoners? Is this the same Afghanistan where insurgents just overan several villages and blew up bridges? Is this the same country where the U.S. and NATO forces have been at war with the Taliban for almost seven years now? Does Mr. Karzai realize how embarrassing such reckless statements are? Who is he trying to bait? Does he realize that Pakistan is a nuclear power and will probably not have any qualms about using it in small doses? Who exactly in Karzai’s Afghanistan is going to do the fighting? What in the world was he smoking when he made those reckless remarks? Why does he not build up an army that can effectively hold a village for a few weeks without collapsing first before trying to take on Pakistan? The U.S. is bogged down in Iraq and an escalation that will draw American or NATO troops into a war or military conflict with Pakistan is not sustainable. Someone, please, take the opium pipe away from Hamid Karzai and tell him to shut up, please.