It bothers me the way the US of A still thinks it is a super power.
In a world of 132 countries, out of which all but 4 belong to a giant organisation that believe in continual progress and (unhampered conduction of) maintainance of cordial relations between all the members of said group, what gives a few select countries the right to lord over all the others? Think Power 5 - Russia, China, America, France, and England. Two decades back, perhaps, they had power. Divided into two block, everyone knows of the power tussles that took place, of the inner logistics. But how relevant are any of those happenings in today's world?
There is no doubt that even as late as 2004 and 5, the US was looked up to as being a major force in the world. It was consulted and thought of, even when desicion maaking was going on between two unrelated countries. A prime example that comes to mind is when Pakistan was accused of sheltering and aiding terrorist groups within their borders. The US put quite a deal of pressure on Pakistan (with respect to 9/11 ) and finally took matters into its own hands on the the day Osama Bin Laden died by sneaking into the country and assasinating him.
When Indian faced a similar problem with the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, it to the US to help it force Pakistan into taking action. It needed someone to help coerce Pakistan into handing over certain key terrorists, but the US pretended like it didn't know what the hell was going on. In my opinion the US is a big bully in the playground of international politics. But bully no longer!
The terrible terrible mistakes made by the Bush administration in Iraq was a herald of things to come. Yes, the Republicans went down soon after that, and when the Democrats took over with Barack Obama at the helm the world held its breath in anticipation of the USA's glory. Then the world got blue in the face and decided to let go.
The 2008 Nobel Peace Prize with given out by a bunch of old school cynical men who were too awed that a major country moved past all it's prejudices and elected someone from a 'disadvantaged group' to the highest post in the country. The world is still having a good laugh about it.
In Obama's first term he managed to put an end to Osama. He managed to pass a major healthcare-for-everyone bill. And then Israel and Gaza happened. Egypt with mouser happened. Jordan and Libya happened. The Arab spring took the world by storm. And everywhere, prominent American professors, journalists and economists were talking about what the Obama administration should do next, criticising American foreign policy, discussing the possible deployment of troops to far off places. Why? Why the need to waste precious American lives in fights involving completely foreign situations? Yes, we get it, the big hungry US of A needs it's energy sources. But alas, such feeble excuses don't hold up to much scrutinity, whatever they might fool themselves with. It's certainly not reason enough to invade another country. A huge organisation like the UN intervening is somewhat acceptable. A bloc consisting of 10 to 15 select countries interfering (think NATO) is less so. A country lending obvious support to another in the form of raw material, trade and artillary when the other counry is the perpetarator of war is unacceptable, and amounts to aggression by the country offering help, and a breach of the sovereignity of both countries involved in the spat. It amazes me to see how its citizens expect the US to regulate all the countries of the world and lord over it, because - surprise surprise - the US is NOT the Lord. It is NOT the master. It gains power only when it's challenge to our sovereignity goes unheeded. This, I'm glad to say, has happened so far, and it doesn't look like it going to happen any time soon
The Obama government might have learnt from its mistakes. It has become tamer - it didn't interfere too much in Crimea. On second thought that might have been because it did not want to start another Cold War with Russia either. It had been antagonised enough over the NSA espionage leaks. Russia is sheltering Edward Snowden till date.
The Modi government is quite a firm one too. Oh boy, didn't the US goof up with that one. When our country voted for 'Achche din', Obama must have cursed his ill luck. Now Mr Modi is making the BRICS nations his priority over other overseas countries, forcing the US to jump through all sorts of hoops to get Modi to visit Washington when he goes to the US this September.
It makes me smile to see how all these important people from so many countries, landing here every other day want just a bit of the Prime Minister's time. Mr Modi too, has clearly shown the world that he does not feel the need to depend on America's goodwill. Now that the bully is bully no longer, things are about to get quite interesting in this playground.
In a world of 132 countries, out of which all but 4 belong to a giant organisation that believe in continual progress and (unhampered conduction of) maintainance of cordial relations between all the members of said group, what gives a few select countries the right to lord over all the others? Think Power 5 - Russia, China, America, France, and England. Two decades back, perhaps, they had power. Divided into two block, everyone knows of the power tussles that took place, of the inner logistics. But how relevant are any of those happenings in today's world?
There is no doubt that even as late as 2004 and 5, the US was looked up to as being a major force in the world. It was consulted and thought of, even when desicion maaking was going on between two unrelated countries. A prime example that comes to mind is when Pakistan was accused of sheltering and aiding terrorist groups within their borders. The US put quite a deal of pressure on Pakistan (with respect to 9/11 ) and finally took matters into its own hands on the the day Osama Bin Laden died by sneaking into the country and assasinating him.
When Indian faced a similar problem with the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, it to the US to help it force Pakistan into taking action. It needed someone to help coerce Pakistan into handing over certain key terrorists, but the US pretended like it didn't know what the hell was going on. In my opinion the US is a big bully in the playground of international politics. But bully no longer!
The terrible terrible mistakes made by the Bush administration in Iraq was a herald of things to come. Yes, the Republicans went down soon after that, and when the Democrats took over with Barack Obama at the helm the world held its breath in anticipation of the USA's glory. Then the world got blue in the face and decided to let go.
The 2008 Nobel Peace Prize with given out by a bunch of old school cynical men who were too awed that a major country moved past all it's prejudices and elected someone from a 'disadvantaged group' to the highest post in the country. The world is still having a good laugh about it.
In Obama's first term he managed to put an end to Osama. He managed to pass a major healthcare-for-everyone bill. And then Israel and Gaza happened. Egypt with mouser happened. Jordan and Libya happened. The Arab spring took the world by storm. And everywhere, prominent American professors, journalists and economists were talking about what the Obama administration should do next, criticising American foreign policy, discussing the possible deployment of troops to far off places. Why? Why the need to waste precious American lives in fights involving completely foreign situations? Yes, we get it, the big hungry US of A needs it's energy sources. But alas, such feeble excuses don't hold up to much scrutinity, whatever they might fool themselves with. It's certainly not reason enough to invade another country. A huge organisation like the UN intervening is somewhat acceptable. A bloc consisting of 10 to 15 select countries interfering (think NATO) is less so. A country lending obvious support to another in the form of raw material, trade and artillary when the other counry is the perpetarator of war is unacceptable, and amounts to aggression by the country offering help, and a breach of the sovereignity of both countries involved in the spat. It amazes me to see how its citizens expect the US to regulate all the countries of the world and lord over it, because - surprise surprise - the US is NOT the Lord. It is NOT the master. It gains power only when it's challenge to our sovereignity goes unheeded. This, I'm glad to say, has happened so far, and it doesn't look like it going to happen any time soon
The Obama government might have learnt from its mistakes. It has become tamer - it didn't interfere too much in Crimea. On second thought that might have been because it did not want to start another Cold War with Russia either. It had been antagonised enough over the NSA espionage leaks. Russia is sheltering Edward Snowden till date.
The Modi government is quite a firm one too. Oh boy, didn't the US goof up with that one. When our country voted for 'Achche din', Obama must have cursed his ill luck. Now Mr Modi is making the BRICS nations his priority over other overseas countries, forcing the US to jump through all sorts of hoops to get Modi to visit Washington when he goes to the US this September.
It makes me smile to see how all these important people from so many countries, landing here every other day want just a bit of the Prime Minister's time. Mr Modi too, has clearly shown the world that he does not feel the need to depend on America's goodwill. Now that the bully is bully no longer, things are about to get quite interesting in this playground.