On The Current International Situation

 Harkishan Singh Surjeet

THE sordid drama being witnessed in Iraq for some time has, however, a positive side. With the passage of time, it is becoming increasingly evident that the world peoples are not going to allow the US of America to ride roughshod over them.

The situation today is dramatically different from 1991-92 when US imperialists posed that they are the masters of the world and that all nations under the sun will have to adjust their policies according to the US wishes. Nay, that was also a time when several --- not only individuals but even groups or nations --- believed that they could make any gains only by keeping the US in good humour. However, it is today clear that the US attempts to establish its hegemony over the world are not going to succeed --- as we had anticipated at that time. In a way, Iraq symbolises a change in popular thinking.

ILLUSTRATIVE SITUATION

THE situation today is illustrative. Felt compelled by the increasing resistance to their occupation, US imperialists have for months been seeking ways to extricate themselves from the Iraq imbroglio and now they have withdrawn their showman, Paul Bremer, from the country. The ostensible plea was that they were making moves to restore the country’s sovereignty, though nobody in the world is willing to bet that the interim government they have put in place in Iraq is not a puppet one. Moreover, American imperialists are themselves not very sure if the Iraqi elections, promised to be held towards the year’s end, will not bring anti-US forces to power. This perhaps explains why a sizeable chunk of the 1,30,000 strong US forces, that invaded the country in March 2003, have been left behind. The puppets have to be guarded, after all!

(Incidentally, one may recall that after the US formally declared an end to its war against Afghanistan and an interim government got installed in Kabul, the idea was that free and fair, internationally supervised elections would take place in the country in six months time. However, no election has taken place to date though more than one year and a half have passed. If, therefore, elections take place in Iraq by the year’s end, it will be only a step short of a miracle.)

At the same time, in a bid to withdraw its forces from the firing line, the US is still trying to persuade other countries to send their forces to Iraq, now under the façade of UN resolution 1546. But the catch is this: the resolution does not categorically ask that the US and its stooges leave the country bag and baggage, hand Iraq’s affairs to the UN system, and then through the UN the world community would see how the country’s sovereignty could be restored and the Iraqi masses helped to stand on their feet. The UN resolution has no meaning till a single combatant from the US or allied countries remains in Iraq. Though a feeble one, the US attempt to keep Iraq’s destiny in its own hands is more than evident.    

In the meantime, the Philippines has already declared its intention to withdraw its troops from Iraq and there are expectations that some others may follow suit. It seems only countries like Ukraine, which have been pauperised during the last one and a half decade and are excessively dollar hungry, are still willing to keep their forces in Iraq under US tutelage. 

EUROPEAN UNION’S EXPANSION

ON the other hand, the recent expansion of European Union (EU) has added yet another dimension to world politics, though its possible implications are still unfathomable. The decision to grant EU membership to ten countries, thus taking its strength from 15 to 25, was announced from Dublin, Ireland’s capital, on May 1 this year. One may note that eight out of the ten new EU members are either former Soviet republics or former socialist countries of eastern Europe, the other two being Malta and the Turkish Cyprus. Turkey, Ukraine and some others are still waiting for their requests to be granted.

The expansion has not added much to the EU’s population or economy. Its population has increased by 75 million --- from 375 million to 450 million. As for economy, the ten new entrants have increased the EU’s GDP by only 5 per cent, pushing it slightly above the USA’s GDP. On the face of it, thus, the gains appear not very significant.

However, some commentators are of the view that the recent expansion was a very clever move on part of the EU. And the reason cited is that the developed countries of western Europe have now gained a “backyard” of the kind the US once had in the form of Latin America. The major difference is that while the US is increasingly losing control of its former backyard because of the strengthening anti-imperialist sentiments in Latin America, new EU members do have illusions of gaining something from the recent expansion. It is another thing that they are more likely to serve as sources of cheap labour and raw materials for the developed EU members as well as a virtually captive market for the latter’s manufactures. In sum, even if the EU’s expansion may appear not very significant at the moment, it is more than likely to give it a significant edge over the US and Japan in future.  

But the problematic area is: how the EU’s expanding economic strength vis-à-vis the US will translate into political and diplomatic terms? Some four years ago, German chancellor Schroeder had suggested that the EU should have its own force, a la NATO, though to avoid any confrontation with the US he hastened to add that this force would not be a rival to the NATO but supplement it. 

QUESTION OF US’S LEGITIMACY

The same desire to assure the US was evident in the recent interview the German foreign minister Joschka Fischer gave to The Hindu during his visit to New Delhi. (See the paper’s July 21 edition.) On the question of dealing with “our American friends,” Fischer said we should “engage with them” primarily on “the future of the 21st century.” He also said the countries that differed with the US on Iraq question must not try to establish a “counter-balancing bloc.” Yet he obliquely refused to toe the American line on Iraq. He said though “we have only one global power” today, the US has to re-establish its legitimacy through the UN system. “The real issue is whether the United States will define herself as part of the UN system --- or not. And we all together have an interest in discussing with our American friends [to persuade them that] they are a part of the UN system.”      

On Iraq question, the German foreign minister categorically said his country was ready to train the new Iraqi police force outside Iraq, provide humanitarian aid and debt relief, and contribute to the country’s reconstruction. But he said “we will not commit ourselves with troops” even if Iraq’s puppet prime minister, Iyad Alawi, makes a request. One will note that the interview came close on the heels of the recent EU summit where there was a sharp division on committing troops to Iraq. 

Thus, even if in a guarded language so as not to annoy the US, countries of the world have begun to question the legitimacy of US action in Iraq, demanding at the same time that the UN system be allowed to play its full role in restoring Iraq’s sovereignty and its reconstruction. Nay, it is no exaggeration to hope that such voices are going to be increasingly strident in the coming days.

However, to repeat, it is still too early to guess as to what will be the consequences of the EU’s growing economic strength, in political and diplomatic fields. 

BUSH GOES SENILE, BLAIR IN A CRISIS

THESE developments come in the background of the Bush-Blair duo’s rapidly falling popularity graph, so much so that Bush is reportedly going senile. Quoting the Daily Times of US, a Times of India report on June 30 said, “US president George Bush is said to have gone crazy, at times going over the edge in cursing the media and liberal critics while calling them enemies of the state.” The report further said: “Bush has become increasingly unpredictable and erratic…. In meetings with top aides and administration officials, the president goes from quoting the Bible in one breath to obscene tantrums against the media, Democrats and others that he classifies as enemies of the state.” And to complete the picture of a president going senile, “The worried White House aides describe Bush as a man on the edge increasingly wary of those who disagree with him and paranoid of a public that no longer trusts his policies in Iraq or at home.”

According to the same Times of India issue, Bush’s “approval rating has fallen to the lowest level of his presidency, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll. The poll found Americans stiffening their opposition to the Iraq war, worried that the invasion could invite domestic terrorist attacks and sceptical about whether the White House has been fully truthful about the war or about abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison.” The said survey showed Bush’s rating at only 42 per cent.

As for Blair, his party’s poor performance in the recent European Parliament polls is a reminder of what is in store for him in British parliamentary polls that are not very far from now. The situation is such that though Blair has completed ten years as leader of the New Labour, thus becoming one of the longest serving Labour Party leaders, “on the eve of what should have been a historic occasion, neither the party nor the “birthday boy” himself is in a mood to celebrate after the recent string of electoral setbacks and the simmering anti-Blair backlash over the Iraq fiasco” (The Hindu, July 21). Instead, his own MPs grilled him whole day in a recent House of Commons sitting over the Butler committee findings about intelligence bloomers. The Iraq issue has indeed “cast a shadow over his leadership as the party prepares for next year’s general election amid growing speculation that he might not survive the political crisis for long.” Compared to last year, according to a Guardian poll, his personal rating has come down by 10 per cent. 

Among the things that are common between Bush and Blair, the most heinous is that both resorted to blatant lies and cheated their citizens and the world in order to manufacture a justification for their war against Iraq. The recent findings in the US senate as well as investigations carried out in the UK go to show the real face of US-UK imperialists who have no care for innocent lives where their dirty interests are involved.

IMPERATIVE OF TODAY

IT is in such a situation that the world peoples are seeking a way out of the present day unipolarity; those in some countries are even challenging the US imperialists directly. Nobody says that this is going to be a smooth process; people will have to make many sacrifices and suffer severe reverses before the world could be made multipolar. But the people’s heartfelt desire is obvious and no less obvious is the resistance being put to US imperialism in political, diplomatic, economic and even military terms. The desire to have a better and more peaceful world to live in is unmistakable.

It is here that countries like Russia, China and India, and also others, have to play a crucial role in strengthening their mutual cooperation. This cooperation, a rejuvenation of the non-aligned movement (NAM) and deepening of the people to people cooperation, do guarantee that the present day unipolarity may be ended.

Sadly, the earlier BJP led government refused to take any such step. While Russia and China were willing to foster cooperation with India, the Vajpayee government spurned the offers of the kind. Neither it wanted to have anything to do with the Shanghai 6 nor it wanted to strengthen the NAM except paying lip service to it. And the reason was obvious. It was an out and out pro-US regime, one whose sole desire was to act as the US’s mercenary in this region, in the vain hope that the US would back it in its communally motivated conflict with Pakistan. Fortunately, that phase has passed and one hopes the UPA regime will take steps to restore our earlier, time-tested foreign policy that always stood us in good stead.

One good indication in this regard is China’s reported willingness to forge ties with the SAARC via India. On July 20, Shen Guofang, Chinese assistant minister for foreign affairs, sought “greater cooperation with the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation,” saying that “Beijing would like to discuss with India how it could develop a partnership with SAARC.” In sum, China is willing not only to develop its relations with India but is also hoping “that China-India business forums could lead to greater cooperation with SAARC.”

This is a positive sign, to say the least, and it seems that this proposal has got a measure of appreciation from SAARC members. With China, India and some other countries already cooperating with the ASEAN, OAU and some other regional forums, we can certainly hope that such a deepening of ties will go a long way in bringing a turn around in the world affairs --- and for the better.