The hypocrisy of the US government is yet again demonstrated in full bore force. The US government invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, laid waste to much of the countries, including entire villages and towns, and massacred untold numbers of civilians in order “to bring democracy” to Iraq and Afghanistan. Now, after days of Egyptians in the streets demanding “Mubarak must go,” the US government remains aligned with its puppet Egyptian ruler, even suggesting that Mubarak, after running a police state for three decades, is the appropriate person to implement democracy in Egypt.
On January 30, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton declared that “freedom and democracy” America neither seeks nor supports the ouster of the Egyptian dictator.
Israeli prime minister Netanyahu told the US and Europe that criticism of Mubarak must be curbed in order “to preserve stability in the region.”
By “stability” Netanyahu means the unimpeded ability of Israel to continue oppressing the Palestinians and stealing their country. Mubarak has been for three decades the well-paid enforcer for the US and Israel, sealing off Gaza from the outside world and preventing aid flows across the Egyptian border. Mubarak and his family have become multi-billionaires, thanks to the American taxpayer, and the US government, both Republicans and Democrats, do not want to lose their heavy investment in Mubarak.
The US government has long corrupted Arab governments by paying rulers installed by the US to represent US/Israeli interests rather than the interest of Arab peoples. Arabs put up with American-financed oppression for many years, but now are showing signs of rebellion.
The murderous American-installed dictator in Tunis was overthrown by people taking to the streets. Rebellion has spread to Egypt and there are also street protests against the US-supported rulers in Yemen and Jordan.
These uprisings might succeed in ousting puppet rulers, but will the result be anything more than the exchange of a new American puppet ruler for the old? Mubarak might go, but whoever takes his place is likely to find himself wearing the same American harness.
What dictators do is to eliminate alternative leadership. Potential leaders are either assassinated, exiled, or imprisoned. Moreover, anything short of a full-fledge revolution, such as the Iranian one, leaves in place a bureaucracy accustomed to business as usual. In addition, Egypt and the country’s military have grown accustomed to American support and will want the money to keep flowing. It is the flow of this money that ensures the purchase of the replacement government.
Because the US dollar is the world reserve currency, the US government has financial dominance and the ability to financially isolate other countries, such as Iran. To break free of America’s grip, one of two things would have to happen. Revolution would have to sweep the Arab world and result in an economic unity that could foster indigenous economic development, or the US dollar has to fail as world currency.
Arab disunity has long been the means by which the Western countries have dominated the Middle East. Without this disunity, Israel and the US could not abuse the Palestinians in the manner in which they have for decades, and without this disunity the US could not have invaded Iraq. It is unlikely that the Arabs will suddenly unite themselves.
The collapse of the dollar is more likely. Indeed, the policy of the US government to maximize both budget and trade deficits, and the policy of the Federal Reserve to monetize the budget deficit and the fraudulent paper assets of the large banks, have the dollar heading for demise.
As the supply of dollars grows, the value diminishes. Perhaps the time is not far off when rulers cease to sell out their peoples for American money.
“The murderous American-installed dictator in Tunis was overthrown by people taking to the streets.”
Who is corrupt? The one that bribes and executes the fiduciary responsibility of his clients, or the one that takes the bribe and fails to execute the fiduciary responsibility of his client. Clearly both participate in corruption. Yet the first does so with the non-hypocritical frankness of a loyal agent. Yet second does so with straight-froward lying to simply further their own personal interests. The second has a moral agency problem. The first uses power effectively.
So the US economy may well suffer. But who will replace it? The Saudi royal family, the Turkish perpetrators of the Armenia genocide? The despots of the Taliban?, The so called democracy of Pakistan? The Chinese society of open dispute and debate?
The islamic world needs to say no to the cocaine of easy money. The addict is at fault, not the supplier. The US population drives the demand for drugs, not the drug providers (though they are not the best of people themselves). Just as when the US population takes personal responsibility to not use drugs and the drug crimes will drop off, so when the islamic persons defend their own freedoms and those of their minority neighbors, the despots will drop off. I hope that the islamic peoples (and those in other despotic regimes) find freedoms in imperfect governments as the US. I certainly do not hope that we in the easy west find the loss of freedom by despots because we failed to defend our freedoms from social and political forces abroad – that is how our revolution started after all.
As to simple hypocrisy: how about a two state solution in which Israel doesn’t exist. Or a rule to demand tolerance for religion that stops a person from criticizing islam?
There is a reason why nations and peoples are fighting. It is not to remove the US, it is to gain freedom – personal, individual freedom from all tyrannies. If all they see is the US is the bad guy, then they will never understand when they themselves choose to become the bad guys (by supporting their local despots).