|
August 24, 2005
Alan Moir tends to repeat himself with his representation of Australia's relationship with the US. He accurately depicts the power relationships between the two nation-states, but he does not capture the tensions or nuances in the relationship:
And there are tensions in the triangle between China, America and Australia: between China as a threat to the US as an empire and China as a trading partner for Australia.
These tensions are often overlaid by the conservative rhetoric of the deep anti-American feeling in Australia that is located on 'the left.'Then we are straight into the culture wars of bashing the left.
In his recent speech to the Australian American Leadership Dialogue Forum Treasurer Costello says that:
The history of the world is replete with powerful states and empires–Rome, the Ottomans, Great Britain. These were powers that ruled large areas of the globe, generally by force. There always has been and, in likelihood, always will be great powers---even hegemons. But if the world is to have a hegemon the modern United States is the kind of hegemon we would like to have--democratic, respectful of human rights, with strong and genuine belief in individual liberty.
Costello accepts the reality of political power in the world of nations, and he acknowledges that the US is the top global power. (the issue of the US aS hegemon or empire is still to be resolved). We can also agree with the Treasurer's claim that:
A stable international order which recognises these values is far preferable to one where great powers seek to extinguish these values, or to an unstable international order where these values cannot be guaranteed or enjoyed.
The issue of the rule of law is put to one side in terms of 'recognition.'
What needs to be put into question about Costello's speech is whether the US under the neo-cons around George Bush is an imperial power that is actually respectful of human rights with a strong and genuine belief in individual liberty. Does the conservative practice accord with the liberal rhetoric?
Actions speak louder than words here. Vietnam was an example of not respecting human rights; nor were the frequent interventions in Latin American to overthrow demcratically elected governments, such as Chile. Okay that was the past. Today we have the Abu Ghraib atrocities in Iraq on the road to democracy in Iraq. The actions do not accord with the words.
|
If I may, I'd like to appoint myself point-officer without portfolio from America, to asuage these growing Oz concerns over our rise to super-duper global dominator status. It's the pendulum thing again - and right now it's just GOT to be at its fullest swing right - I hope. (We love the Aussies up here, and my guess is we'd gladly sign up en masse to defend her if anything ever went awry with your neighbors.)
Yes, our current administration has done plenty to mangle our reputation worldwide, but most of us (OK, 51% of us) are holding our breath until we get another President. We're tired of being looked at as Imperialists - and some of us are actively investigating Australian immigration policies while reading books on your land, planning someday to vacate this stinking/sinking ship and start anew in the only real Land of Opportunity left on the globe. We hope by then that we don't have to disguise our origins, anti-Americanism having become so vehement in Oz by then that all of us are regarded negatively.
Seems to this commentator that Australia is what the US was many years ago. "Liberty and Justice for all" - and all that.
So - to answer the question: Yes, the US under the neo-cons is an Imperial power, with a marketing finger to the wind with regard to human rights and individual liberty.
www.radiofreebabylon.com
www.romandog.blogspot.com