The Inside Assyria Discussion Forum

=> Hegemony or Survival

Hegemony or Survival
Posted by Tiglath (Guest) - Thursday, September 21 2006, 12:17:48 (CEST)
from 210.49.155.2 - c210-49-155-2.eburwd3.vic.optusnet.com.au Australia - Windows XP - Internet Explorer
Website:
Website title:

July 2001

By Noam Chomsky


At the end of June,, the UN Conference on Disarmament concludes the second of its year 2001 sessions. Prospects for any constructive outcome of disarmament efforts are slim. Discussions have been blocked by US insistence on pursuing ballistic missile defense (BMD) programs, against near-unanimous opposition.
On the purpose of BMD, there is a fair measure of agreement across a broad
spectrum. Potential adversaries regard it as an offensive weapon. Reagan's SDI
("Star wars") was understood in the same light. China's top arms control official simply reflected common understanding when he observed that "Once the United States believes it has both a strong spear and a strong shield, it could lead them to conclude that nobody can harm the United States and they can harm anyone they like anywhere in the world. There could be many more bombings like what happened in Kosovo" -- the reaction of most of the world to what was perceived as a reversion to the "gunboat wars" of a century ago, with the "colonial powers of the West, with overwhelming technological advantages, subduing natives and helpless countries that had no ability to defend themselves," doing as they choose while "cloaked in moralistic righteousness" (Israeli military analyst Amos Gilboa). The reaction to the US-UK Gulf War was much the same among the traditional "natives and helpless countries." Fortunately for its self-image, Western ideology is well-insulated from
such departures from right thinking.
China is also well aware that it is not immune. It knows that the US and NATO
maintain the right of first use of nuclear weapons, and knows as well as US military analysts that "Flights by U.S. EP-3 planes near China...are not just for passive surveillance; the aircraft also collect information used to develop nuclear war plans"
(William Arkin, _Bull. of Atomic Scientists_, May/June 2001).
Canadian military planners advised their government that the goal of BMD is
"arguably more in order to preserve U.S./NATO freedom of action than because U.S.
really fears North Korean or Iranian threat." Prominent strategic analysts agree. BMD "will facilitate the more effective application of U.S. military power abroad, Andrew Bacevich writes (National Interest, Summer 2001): "By insulating the homeland from reprisal -- albeit in a limited way -- missile defense will underwrite the capacity and willingness of the United States to `shape' the environment elsewhere." He cites approvingly the conclusion of Lawrence Kaplan: "Missile defense isn't really meant to protect America. It's a tool for global dominance," for "hegemony."

That this goal should be embraced by all right-thinking people follows at once from the principles of the "respectable" opinion that "defines the parameters within which the policy debate occurs." The spectrum is very broad: it excludes only "tattered remnants of hard-core isolationists" and "those few beleaguered radicals still pining for the glory days of the 1960s," and is "so authoritative as to be virtually immune to challenge" (Bacevich). The first principle is straightforward: "_America as historical vanguard_." According to this authoritative principle, "history has a discernible..



---------------------


The full topic:



Content-length: 3674
Content-type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
Accept: image/gif, image/x-xbitmap, image/jpeg, image/pjpeg, application/vnd.ms-excel, application/vnd.ms-powerpoint, applicatio...
Accept-encoding: gzip, deflate
Accept-language: en-au
Cache-control: no-cache
Connection: Keep-Alive
Cookie: *hidded*
Host: www.insideassyria.com
Referer: http://www.insideassyria.com/rkvsf4/rkvsf_core.php?Chavez_s_speech_at_the_UN_today-Veoq.1FUg.REPLY
User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1)



Powered by RedKernel V.S. Forum 1.2.b9