Archive for June 24th, 2005

Concrete Ideas and Iraq

Hobsbawm in today’s Guardian on the neo-cons:

All the great powers and empires of history knew that they were
not the only ones, and none was in a position to aim at genuinely global
domination. None believed themselves to be invulnerable.

Nevertheless, this does not quite explain the evident megalomania of US
policy since a group of Washington insiders decided that September 11 gave
them the ideal opportunity for declaring its single-handed domination of the
world. For one thing, it lacked the support of the traditional pillars of
the post-1945 US empire, the state department, armed services and
intelligence establishment, and of the statesmen and ideologists of cold war
supremacy – men like Kissinger and Brzezinski. These were people who were as
ruthless as the Rumsfelds and Wolfowitzes. (It was in their time that a
genocide of Mayas took place in Guatemala in the 1980s.) They had devised
and managed a policy of imperial hegemony over the greater part of the globe
for two generations, and were perfectly ready to extend it to the entire
globe. They were and are critical of the Pentagon planners and
neo-conservative world supremacists because these patently have had no
concrete ideas at all, except imposing their supremacy single-handed by military
force, incidentally jettisoning all the
accumulated experience of US
diplomacy and military planning. No doubt the
debacle of Iraq will confirm
them in their scepticism.

No doubt Bush disagrees:

“We are there to complete a mission, and it’s an important
mission,” he said. “A democratic Iraq is in the interests of the United States,
and it’s in the interests of laying the foundation for peace.”

I on Twitter

June 2005