Home
Previous letters
Subscribe
Useful links
About me
Contact me
|
WORLD CITIZEN LETTER: 563
View full list of previous letters
Receive future letters by email
WCL 563 June 2007
The next thirty years war
Recently their ambassador in Kabul has warmed the British people that their soldiers now in Afghanistan can expect to be in the country for 30 years (no doubt if not killed or rotated). So the grand old imperialist traditions of British travails in the 19th century will be carried on well into the 21st. Presumably with similar lack of success, although that was not in the message. Nor did the ambassador hint at what global warming will by 2037 will have done to Afghanistan, let alone to the countries providing the troops to occupy the territory!
What are British soldiers doing there at all? They were part of a NATO force supposedly tackling a task on behalf of the world community, originally possibly legitimately commissioned by the United Nations, but now way our of kilter with the intentions and decisions undertaken in the first panic. That was over the threat posed by Al-Qaeda and other terrorists protected by the Taliban, the band of extremists whose rise had been much assisted by the machinations of the CIA and the Pakistani military. They also had the task of eliminating the opium crop, which is now once again at a record level.
NATO is a military alliance, dominated by the United States and acting generally on behalf of that imperialist power, which is avowedly intent on 'full spectrum' military domination of the world. That may be in order to protect all of us from "terrorism" or it may be to forward the somewhat narrower aims of the U.S. Pentagon and State Department. In any case, the methods used and the ends sought are not at all likely to be in the best interests of the world community.
Any action to be taken legally in a country or region by foreign forces needs to be under strict conditions and rules laid down by the world community. These must be not aggressive, but police, action, to uphold international or, better, world law. That is not going to happen under the auspices of the United States, which is often intent upon frustrating the application of international law and obstructing the development of world law that needs the upholding of the International Criminal Court.
The U.S. has tried for the past decade to sabotage that one fruitful and promising reform of the global political structure represented by the I.C.C. as it has already succeeded in limiting its scope and weakening capacity. Instead, the U.S. has only been content to act with world legal projects such as court proceedings for particular crises. In such cases it was able to determine the constitution of the courts and hold a veto over their activities.
To leave British (or any other national troops) to struggle in Afghanistan or any other areaa of conflict with military objectives determined, in the last resort, by American government and American interests is a recipe for continuing conflict, not just for 30 years, but into an indefinite future. The pattern of Iraq, where American oil and other commercial interests have made a mockery of the idea of reconstruction and democratic reform, will be reproduced everywhere.
The world needs law and it needs world police to uphold it; but those things must be achieved, not by American sheriffs led by gung-ho generals who want to re-run the Vietnam campaigns with different results. It requires a democratic system for raising properly trained and organized forces, paid by and loyal to a reformed United Nations, or a better, more democratic world organization. That will have to be equipped to handle not only a restless and militarized world, but one willing and able to fend of the disasters that will arrive with global warming.
John Roberts
Comment on this letter
View full list of previous letters
Receive future letters by email
Comments on this letter
|
|