Home  
0
0

Contact Us

Feedback Form

About Us

Web Links

Visit this group

Ponzi Capitalism and the Deepening Moral Crisis

The Roller Coaster: The Communist Party in the 1940s

Rebuilding the Labor Movement in the 21st Century, an Interview with Scott Marshall

Police Escalate Attacks on First Amendment Rights

Public Option: Worth the Fight

Our Socialist Inheritance and Future

Past, Present and Future: The Politics of Reform in the Era of Obama

Needed: Constitutional Amendment for the Right to a Earn a Living Wage

Why Should Grassroots Liberals Consider Marxism?

Is That Specter Really Collapsing?

Carlo Tresca: The Dilemma of an Anti-Communist Radical

The Brief, Revolutionary Life of Joe Hill

Movie Review: Giải phóng Sài Gòn

Review: Logicomix: An Epic Search for Truth

Poetry, November 2009

/Archives - Dates and Topics /2005 – online /March – April 2005 /Mar. 21 – 26 Print | Send to friend

US Foreign Policy Double Standards



click here for related stories: democracy matters
3-25-05, 11:14 am

Condoleezza Rice's visit to Asia has encapsulated the single-minded hypocrisy of the George W Bush administration's foreign policy.

She has preached democracy, control of arms sales and respect for human rights selectively. That's why Iraq and Afghanistan are portrayed as on the road to democracy and freedom, while the dreaded D-word passes unmentioned in Pakistan.

Pakistan is groaning under a military dictatorship following General Musharraf's coup d'etat, but he has paid lip service to the US war on terror, so his regime is regarded as objectively pro-democracy.

Such double standards are not a problem for Ms Rice, since she has taken her lesson from her commander in chief.

Just weeks after proclaiming the rebirth of democracy in Iraq, where the US continues its illegal war, Mr Bush was blissfully unaware of any irony in lecturing the Syrian government to remove its troops from Lebanon on the grounds that free elections under military occupation were impossible.

He might also have pondered the impact on democracy of US military bases in over 100 countries around the world.

As ever, Washington behaves as though the rules that bind the rest of the world are, at best, optional with regard to itself.

The Bush administration has made clear its contempt for international law, flouting it whenever it decides to use military power as an alternative means of persuasion.

Washington's apologists, such as Tony Blair, argue that international law should be amended to fit the superpower's priorities.

Do you subscribe to Political Affairs?

click image to find out how



Kofi Annan's proposal to facilitate military intervention in countries accused of involvement in terrorism or human rights violations is a gesture toward US demands to override security council vetoes of its international gendarme role.

Needless to say, the US would not let go of its veto on decisive action against Israel for its refusal to abide by international law over its illegal occupation of Arab lands.

Nor would the US allow the European Union to lecture it on arms deliveries to Israel in the way that Ms Rice does over EU plans to lift its arms sales embargo on China.

She has spoken out against the Chinese parliament's decision to authorise force as a last resort to prevent the secession of Taiwan, ignoring the fact that her country fought a long civil war on just that issue.

China has already achieved the decolonisation of Hong Kong and Macau by peaceful purposes. There is little reason to suppose that Taiwan will be different.

The main complicating factor is the role of the US, which encouraged divisive elements in Taiwan by arming them to the teeth and having them seated for decades in the UN in China's place.

Ms Rice told the EU to recognise that it was the US alone that has "defended" Asia.

By this, doubtless, she means the division of China, the invasions of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, the enforced separation of the Korean peninsula, the murderous Suharto coup in Indonesia and backing for corrupt neocolonial regimes in the Philippines and elsewhere.

A Labour government should be encouraging international co-operation on the basis of equality instead of aligning itself with this outdated imperialist approach.


(From Morning Star)


» Home » Online Edition » March Print Edition » Subscribe








blog comments powered by Disqus
Take a Stand
( 10/01/2003 18:49 )


newcatcher@cpusa.org