Imperial PAX Americana

Imperial PAX Americana - By Selwyn Manning – Scoop deputy editor.

There’s an image that provides insight into the USA’s view of the world, how it eyes the universal citizen, and, now we have a document that details the global role its government believes the USA must command.

Amid sustained US bombing of Afghanistan, US ‘friendly fire’ reigned down on civilians, alliance personnel, and its own United States operatives.

Exploding shells, bombs, ‘friendly shrapnel’ brought casualty and death. A foreign correspondent cameraman captured the scene.

In one sense the footage was usual. People, lying, bleeding, dead and dying. Usual but for one thing; there for the world to see was a senior US officer shouting: get the camera out “we have dead Americans here!”.

It was street-level journalism at its best. Enter Imperial PAX Americana – the emergence of ‘the great United States superhuman’ special rights status assumed.

Forget the adage: ashes and diamonds, foe and friend, we were all equal in the end. If the USA is to assume the role of Planet Police, Global Enforcer, Constitutional Author of Universal Human Rights… we all had better get used to divisions and classifications, a detail by degrees that classifies the sanctity of human life, human respect, as proportioned, and yes determined, by one’s citizenship.

The Roman Empire’s foreign policy had nothing on this new world order. Here is Imperial Pax Americana right from the horse’s mouth.

This week the United States of America released a blueprint for the USA’s advance toward world domination.

Sound oddly familiar? Yes you’ve seen the movies too. But this is far from entertaining. This is revelation of biblical proportions. This is lunacy of a most dire kind. This is the PAX Americana Blueprint in its raw and open form.

George W Bush titled the Blueprint: The National Security Strategy of the United States of America. For the entire document, see: http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/WO0209/S00220.htm

It opens: “Today, the United States enjoys a position of unparalleled military strength and great economic and political influence.

In keeping with our heritage and principles, we do not use our strength to press for unilateral advantage. We seek instead to create a balance of power that favours human freedom: conditions in which all nations and all societies can choose for themselves the rewards and challenges of political and economic liberty. In a world that is safe, people will be able to make their own lives better. We will defend the peace by fighting terrorists and tyrants. We will preserve the peace by building good relations among the great powers. We will extend the peace by encouraging free and open societies on every continent.”

All sounds nice and dandy. But consider the United States version of political and economic liberty, peace, free and open societies. History interprets in relatively recent detail carnage, murder, environmental disasters, assassinations, war crimes, cover-ups, governmental corruption, contra-deals, National Guard killings of its own unarmed citizens during peaceful university protest, manipulative placement and support for dictatorships in strategic regions of the world, costly and forcible removal of those US-sanctioned CIA puppets once they go bad. All this was done in the name of liberty, peace and free and open society. And that sorry cycle brings us back to Iraq.

But this PAX Americana Blueprint goes further than any previous foreign policy. The rhetoric compares only to campaigns of grand historical conquests, but more sophisticated in its delivery.

The attacks against New York’s World Trade Centre and the Pentagon have paved the way for a new world order.

The Blueprint states: “Defending our Nation against its enemies is the first and fundamental commitment of the Federal Government. Today, that task has changed dramatically. Enemies in the past needed great armies and great industrial capabilities to endanger America. Now, shadowy networks of individuals can bring great chaos and suffering to our shores for less than it costs to purchase a single tank. Terrorists are organized to penetrate open societies and to turn the power of modern technologies against us.

“To defeat this threat we must make use of every tool in our arsenal—military power, better homeland defences, law enforcement, intelligence, and vigorous efforts to cut off terrorist financing.”

The Blueprint has gathered critics from within the most elite United States conventions. Here is a snapshot:

John Spratt, Democrat, South Carolina is the top Democrat on the United States’ House of Representatives Budget Committee. He released a report Monday saying a war with Iraq could cost the US $93 billion, not including US peacekeeping and rebuilding efforts that might follow.

Lawrence Lindsey, Bush's top economic adviser, said last week that the price tag could reach $200 billion, although White House budget chief Mitchell Daniels said that figure seemed a tad too high.

Acting without the support of allies, former President Jimmy Carter told reporters, would be "a radical departure from traditions that have shaped our nation's policy by Democratic and Republican presidents for more than 50 years."

Dennis Kucinich, Democrat, Ohio, an outspoken critic of going to war with Iraq, said he was deeply disturbed that the "country which I love so much" is speaking about assassination, pre-emptive strikes, unilateral action and overthrowing a government. "This is not an America that I recognise," Kucinich said.

Former Vice President Al Gore said: "After Sept. 11, we had enormous sympathy, goodwill and support around the world. We've squandered that, and in one year we've replaced that with fear, anxiety and uncertainty, not at what the terrorists are going to do but at what we are going to do." In his first major speech on the Iraq situation, Gore, a possible future Democratic presidential candidate, accused Bush of abandoning the goal of a world where nations follow laws: "That concept would be displaced by the notion that there is no law but the discretion of the president of the United States," he said. "If other nations assert the same right, then the rule of law will quickly be replaced by the reign of fear," and any nation that perceives itself threatened would feel justified in starting wars, Gore said. The comments are all made within the context of the USA orchestrating unilateral war against Iraq.

If the distress displayed by ‘thinking Americans’ is anything to go by, we ought to be gravely concerned indeed.

The PAX Americana Blueprint abandons Universal Law, as Scoop Media editor Alastair Thompson writes: “His [George W Bush’s] statement is the equivalent of a sheriff announcing publicly that regardless of whether he is granted an arrest warrant or not by a magistrate he intends to enforce his own justice anyway. The President’s arrogance in doing so is breathtaking in its gall. His comments come across as a challenge to the United Nations to defy him. “And then we’ll show them,” he is saying. From the perspective of International relations nothing could be more serious than this affront to the legal framework that has prevented, so far, a major conflagration since the end of the Second World War,” Alastair Thompson writes.

The view is supported when one considers ‘objectively’ the issue from a distance.

Consider this from the PAX Americana Blueprint: “Defending the United States, the American people, and our interests at home and abroad by identifying and destroying the threat before it reaches our borders. While the United States will constantly strive to enlist the support of the international community, we will not hesitate to act alone, if necessary, to exercise our right of self defence by acting pre-emptively against such terrorists, to prevent them from doing harm against our people and our country; and denying further sponsorship, support, and sanctuary to terrorists by convincing or compelling states to accept their sovereign responsibilities. We will also wage a war of ideas to win the battle against international terrorism.”

George W Bush stated to his elite West Point military academy in June: “The gravest danger to freedom lies at the crossroads of radicalism and technology. When the spread of chemical and biological and nuclear weapons, along with ballistic missile technology—when that occurs, even weak states and small groups could attain a catastrophic power to strike great nations. Our enemies have declared this very intention, and have been caught seeking these terrible weapons. They want the capability to blackmail us, or to harm us, or to harm our friends—and we will oppose them with all our power.”

The rhetoric, the US President’s view, has paved acceptance within that country’s people for a plan to abandon a legislative international order that rests on an ethic of equal human standing, of equal nation status on the global scene.

But The PAX Americana Blueprint casts that ethic off as it would a shackle. “Our comprehensive strategy to combat Weapons of Mass Destruction includes: Proactive counter-proliferation efforts. “We must deter and defend against the threat before it is unleashed. “The United States must also be prepared to respond to the effects of WMD use against our forces abroad, and to help friends and allies if they are attacked… We cannot let our enemies strike first.”

The PAX Americana Blueprint reminds the international community that the United States has long maintained the option of pre-emptive actions to counter a sufficient threat to its national security.

“The greater the threat, the greater is the risk of inaction— and the more compelling the case for taking anticipatory action to defend ourselves, even if uncertainty remains as to the time and place of the enemy’s attack.”

To support its pre-emptive options the USA will “build better, more integrated intelligence capabilities to provide timely, accurate information on threats, wherever they may emerge; coordinate closely with allies to form a common assessment of the most dangerous threats; and continue to transform our military forces to ensure our ability to conduct rapid and precise operations to achieve decisive results”.

“The purpose of our actions will always be to eliminate a specific threat to the United States or our allies and friends. The reasons for our actions will be clear, the force measured, and the cause just.”

The PAX Americana Blueprint intends to “ignite a new era” of global economic growth through free markets and free trade.

It is a bizarre statement considering the vast and costly protectionisms the United States hordes to ensure its industrialists and corporate owned commodity producers remain fat and purring.

That reality of ingrained domestic US subsidy did cast a bizarre shadow over Bush’s hollow old-right rant in Monterrey, Mexico in March 2002: "When nations close their markets and opportunity is hoarded by a privileged few, no amount-no amount-of development aid is ever enough. When nations respect their people, open markets, invest in better health and education, every dollar of aid, every dollar of trade revenue and domestic capital is used more effectively."

It is clearly a smokescreen almost as thick as the pollutants the United States belches globally in proportions it cannot contain.

While being chastised globally for its opposition of the Kyoto Protocol, the world’s greatest polluter assures us all that it will: “accompany economic international reform with global efforts to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations associated with this growth, containing them at a level that prevents dangerous human interference with the global climate. Our overall objective is to reduce America’s greenhouse gas emissions relative to the size of our economy, cutting such emissions per unit of economic activity by 18 percent over the next 10 years, by the year 2012. Our strategies for attaining this goal will be to: remain committed to the basic U.N. Framework Convention for international cooperation; obtain agreements with key industries to cut emissions of some of the most potent greenhouse gases and give transferable credits to companies that can show real cuts; develop improved standards for measuring and registering emission reductions; promote renewable energy production and clean coal technology, as well as nuclear power—which produces no greenhouse gas emissions, while also improving fuel economy for U.S. cars and trucks; increase spending on research and new conservation technologies, to a total of $4.5 billion—the largest sum being spent on climate change by any country in the world and a $700 million increase over last year’s budget; and assist developing countries, especially the major greenhouse gas emitters such as China and India, so that they will have the tools and resources to join this effort and be able to grow along a cleaner and better path.”

Are we assured? Ask those on the Sub Continent. The Union Carbide experience may produce a response Bush will not tolerate. Indeed Enron’s handling of joint venture infrastructural development in India was nothing short of a swindle of tragic human consequence. Distrust pervades.

But the PAX Americana Blueprint states: “A strong world economy enhances our national security by advancing prosperity and freedom in the rest of the world. Economic growth supported by free trade and free markets creates new jobs and higher incomes. It allows people to lift their lives out of poverty, spurs economic and legal reform, and the fight against corruption, and it reinforces the habits of liberty.”

Oh yes?

“The United States will implement legal and regulatory policies to encourage business investment, innovation, and entrepreneurial activity; tax policies—particularly lower marginal tax rates—that improve incentives for work and investment; rule of law and intolerance of corruption so that people are confident that they will be able to enjoy the fruits of their economic endeavours; strong financial systems that allow capital to be put to its most efficient use; sound fiscal policies to support business activity; investments in health and education that improve the well-being and skills of the labour force and population as a whole; and free trade that provides new avenues for growth and fosters the diffusion of technologies and ideas that increase productivity and opportunity.”

Again in his June 1 address to West Point Bush said: “We have our best chance since the rise of the nation-state in the 17th century to build a world where the great powers compete in peace instead of prepare for war.”

Bush intends to begin building his new world in the Middle East, backed by a United Europe.

The PAX Americana Blueprint states: “Europe is also the seat of two of the strongest and most able international institutions in the world: the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which has, since its inception, been the fulcrum of transatlantic and inter-European security, and the European Union (EU), our partner in opening world trade.”

Naom Chomsky considered recently the consequences of an American occupied Iraq. Chomsky said: “The world would be better off if he [Saddam Hussein] weren't there, no doubt about that. Surely Iraqis would.

But he can't be anywhere near as dangerous as he was when the US and Britain were supporting him [pre-1991], even providing him with dual-use technology that he could use for nuclear and chemical weapons development, as he presumably did.”

Chomsky also sees an US/Iraqi was of further destabilising and already unstable Middle East.

“Israeli aircraft based in Turkey are reported to be flying reconnaisance flights along Iran's borders, part of a general US-Israel-Turkey policy of threatening Iran with attack and perhaps forceful partitioning. “Israeli analysts also report that joint US-Israel-Turkey air exercises are intended as a threat and warning to Iran. And of course to Iraq (Robert Olson, Middle East Policy, June 2002). Israel is doubtless using the huge US air bases in Eastern Turkey, where the US bombers are presumably nuclear-armed. By now Israel is virtually an offshore US military base. “And the rest of the area is armed to the teeth as well. If Iraq were governed by Gandhi, it would be developing weapons systems if it could, probably well beyond what it can today. That would very likely continue, perhaps even accelerate, if the US takes control of Iraq. India and Pakistan are US allies, but are marching forward with the development of WMD and repeatedly have come agonizingly close to using nuclear weapons. The same is true of other US allies and clients,” Chomsky says.

He says the stock of weapons of mass destruction will blow out unless there is a general reduction of armaments in the area. And that wont happen while the United States pursues an aggressive foreign policy.

You are either with us or with the Terrorists: The PAX Americana Blueprint details the diplomacy of shared victim impact: “attacks of September 11 were also an attack on NATO, as NATO itself recognized when it invoked its Article V self-defence clause for the first time. NATO’s core mission—collective defence of the transatlantic alliance of democracies —remains, but NATO must develop new structures and capabilities to carry out that mission under new circumstances. NATO must build a capability to field, at short notice, highly mobile, specially trained forces whenever they are needed to respond to a threat against any member of the alliance.

“The alliance must be able to act wherever our interests are threatened, creating coalitions under NATO’s own mandate, as well as contributing to mission-based coalitions. To achieve this, we must…expand NATO’s membership to those democratic nations willing and able to share the burden of defending and advancing our common interests; ensure that the military forces of NATO nations have appropriate combat contributions to make in coalition warfare; develop planning processes to enable those contributions to become effective multinational fighting forces; take advantage of the technological opportunities and economies of scale in our defence spending to transform NATO military forces so that they dominate potential aggressors and diminish our vulnerabilities; streamline and increase the flexibility of command structures to meet new operational demands and the associated requirements of training, integrating, and experimenting with new force configurations; and maintain the ability to work and fight together as allies even as we take the necessary steps to transform and modernize our forces.”

The PAX Americana Blueprint lists support from “America’s Asian alliances”. The countries include: Australia, Japan the Republic of Korea, Thailand, the Philippines, Singapore and New Zealand. The war against terrorism has proven that America’s alliances in Asia are “flexible and ready” to deal with new challenges.

The USA plans to court Japan, “work with” South Korea, “build on 50 years of U.S.-Australian alliance cooperation”, “maintain forces in the region that reflect our commitments to our allies, our requirements, our technological advances, and the strategic environment.”

The PAX Americana Blueprint will side up to ASEAN and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum, APEC, to develop strategies to manage change in Asia and Oceania. The “Great powers” of Russia, India, and China are, in the USA’s view, in transition toward embracing the PAX American way.

“In all three cases, recent developments have encouraged our hope that a truly global consensus about basic principles is slowly taking shape.

The USA promises to facilitate Russia’s entry into the World Trade Organization. But the Blueprint acknowledges a “lingering distrust of our motives and policies by key Russian elites slows improvement in our relations”.

The United States is working on a new relationship with India.

“We are the two largest democracies, committed to political freedom protected by representative government. India is moving toward greater economic freedom as well. We have a common interest in the free flow of commerce, including through the vital sea lanes of the Indian Ocean. Finally, we share an interest in fighting terrorism and in creating a strategically stable Asia.

“Differences remain, including over the development of India’s nuclear and missile programs, and the pace of India’s economic reforms. But while in the past these concerns may have dominated our thinking about India, today we start with a view of India as a growing world power with which we have common strategic interests. Through a strong partnership with India, we can best address any differences and shape a dynamic future.”

The United States’ relationship with China, the Blueprint states, is an important part of the USA’s strategy to promote a stable, peaceful, and prosperous Asia-Pacific region.

“In pursuing advanced military capabilities that can threaten its neighbours in the Asia-Pacific region, China is following an outdated path that, in the end, will hamper its own pursuit of national greatness. In time, China will find that social and political freedom is the only source of that greatness.”

And ultimately the PAX Americana Blueprint details an aggressive and massive build up of United States military supremacy that it will ensure is second to no other nation.

“It is time to reaffirm the essential role of American military strength. We must build and maintain our defences beyond challenge. Our military’s highest priority is to defend the United States. To do so effectively, our military must: assure our allies and friends; dissuade future military competition; deter threats against U.S. interests, allies, and friends; and decisively defeat any adversary if deterrence fails.”

Again, the Blueprint details an insistence that the USA will strike first.

“The unparalleled strength of the United States armed forces, and their forward presence, have maintained the peace in some of the world’s most strategically vital regions. However, the threats and enemies we must confront have changed, and so must our forces. A military structured to deter massive Cold War-era armies must be transformed to focus more on how an adversary might fight rather than where and when a war might occur. We will channel our energies to overcome a host of operational challenges.”

The Blueprint dictates that the United States will demonstrate to all nations its supreme military might, including a strike force from “Outer Space”.

“The presence of American forces overseas is one of the most profound symbols of the U.S. commitments to allies and friends… To contend with uncertainty and to meet the many security challenges we face, the United States will require bases and stations within and beyond Western Europe and Northeast Asia, as well as temporary access arrangements for the long-distance deployment of U.S. forces.”

“We must prepare for more such deployments [than Afghanistan] by developing assets such as advanced remote sensing, long-range precision strike capabilities, and transformed manoeuvre and expeditionary forces.

“This broad portfolio of military capabilities must also include the ability to defend the homeland, conduct information operations, ensure U.S. access to distant theatres, and protect critical U.S. infrastructure and assets in outer space.”

It plans to experiment: “Innovation within the armed forces will rest on experimentation with new approaches to warfare, strengthening joint operations, exploiting U.S. intelligence advantages, and taking full advantage of science and technology.”

Finally, the PAX Americana Blueprint states the overall goal “must be to provide the President with a wider range of military options to discourage aggression or any form of coercion against the United States, our allies, and our friends.”

It states that deterrence can fail. The United States will “dissuade” potential adversaries from pursuing a military build-up in “hopes of surpassing, or equalling, the power of the United States”.

And if the former Cold War engendered a world of espionage, spies, spooks and wire-taps… consider this: “Intelligence—and how we use it—is our first line of defence against terrorists and the threat posed by hostile states. Designed around the priority of gathering enormous information about a massive, fixed object—the Soviet bloc—the intelligence community is coping with the challenge of following a far more complex and elusive set of targets.

“We must transform our intelligence capabilities and build new ones to keep pace with the nature of these threats… We must strengthen intelligence warning and analysis to provide integrated threat assessments for national and homeland security. Since the threats inspired by foreign governments and groups may be conducted inside the United States, we must also ensure the proper fusion of information between intelligence and law enforcement.

“Initiatives in this area will include: strengthening the authority of the Director of Central Intelligence to lead the development and actions of the Nation’s foreign intelligence capabilities; establishing a new framework for intelligence warning that provides seamless and integrated warning across the spectrum of threats facing the nation and our allies; continuing to develop new methods of collecting information to sustain our intelligence advantage; investing in future capabilities while working to protect them through a more vigorous effort to prevent the compromise of intelligence capabilities; and collecting intelligence against the terrorist danger across the government with all-source analysis.”

And be assured, US President George W Bush wants you to love America.

“Just as our diplomatic institutions must adapt so that we can reach out to others, we also need a different and more comprehensive approach to public information efforts that can help people around the world learn about and understand America. The war on terrorism is not a clash of civilizations. It does, however, reveal the clash inside a civilization, a battle for the future of the Muslim world. This is a struggle of ideas and this is an area where America must excel.”

And it has moved to legislate that no “American” will be tried for war crimes in any foreign court.

“We will take the actions necessary to ensure that our efforts to meet our global security commitments and protect Americans are not impaired by the potential for investigations, inquiry, or prosecution by the International Criminal Court (ICC), whose jurisdiction does not extend to Americans and which we do not accept.”

Concern not yourselves with My Lai, or a host of other atrocities: “We will work together with other nations to avoid complications in our military operations and cooperation, through such mechanisms as multilateral and bilateral agreements that will protect U.S. nationals from the ICC. We will implement fully the American Service members Protection Act, whose provisions are intended to ensure and enhance the protection of U.S. personnel and officials.”

And in conclusion, this George W Bush assurance of “building a new world” Americans will be open to people, ideas, and goods from across the globe.

“In exercising our leadership, we will respect the values, judgment, and interests of our friends and partners. Still, we will be prepared to act apart when our interests and unique responsibilities require. When we disagree on particulars, we will explain forthrightly the grounds for our concerns and strive to forge viable alternatives. We will not allow such disagreements to obscure our determination to secure together, with our allies and our friends, our shared fundamental interests and values.

“Ultimately, the foundation of American strength is at home. It is in the skills of our people, the dynamism of our economy, and the resilience of our institutions. A diverse, modern society has inherent, ambitious, entrepreneurial energy. Our strength comes from what we do with that energy. That is where our national security begins.”

Be assured, this is the dawning of Imperial PAX Americana.

But will it end there? History shows that that would be unlikely. Placing aside the advance of Islamic and Arab opposition to change in the Middle East, economic erosion will likely bring about the collapse of the United States as we know it.

The costs of this PAX Americana global campaign will impact greatly on ‘The American People’.

Already the United States’ economy shows signs of vulnerability: an erratic share-market, producing volatile highs and lows.

This will likely further erode confidence in the US Dollar. Already the economic roller-coaster experienced post-September 11 has exposed corporate USA for its miss-management, incompetence, corruption and malpractice. Once protected by US legalise, recent revelations of business fraud has slapped the United States’ business wing with a ‘global charlatan” stigma.

The United States NEEDS an alliance of wealthy economies to buy into this war. And ultimately, the United States needs Germany.

Germany realised that Bush’s ‘Uncle Sam Wants You!’ schmooze was as much about Germany paying heavily in Deutsche Marks as it was for military collateral. The German people also realised this.

Gerhard Schroeder’s stance against a war with Iraq even if the United Nations endorses it, has driven a wedge through the European Union. Most outspoken against the German position is Italy that has been advancing the United States’ rhetoric within the EU, no doubt Italy has been quick to consider trade advancement and access to the product hungry American consumer as a payback for brokering the American line within the Union.

For PAX Americana, Europe’s old money is essential. The consequences of the alternative will be dire and rock the very fabric of American society.

The cost to the ‘American People’ for their leader’s lust to settle a decade-old family feud with Iraq is only the beginning. Should Germany not come back to the war-table, $200 billion will be siphoned from the US economy. Forget Medicaide, forget government assisted housing programmes, forget moves toward education equality, and most destructively, a predicted end through necessity to United States industrial protectionisms, removal of subsidies to heavy industry and commodity producers.

The framework is displayed within the PAX Americana Blueprint, packaged in foreign economic development incentives.

Without such protectionisms, United States industry and manufacturers will surely collapse. It cannot and will not compete with low GDP, high labour-force economies of ASEAN, APEC and indeed developing economies within sectors of the former USSR.

Faced with economic collapse, the ‘American People’ would face failing consumerism, a domestic economy in freefall, societal chaos, and the further collapse of the United States’ pillar institutions.

We are witnessing the rise and, while yet the means is to be determined, the probable future fall of Imperial PAX Americana.

Hail for we have ‘Americans here’.

© Scoop Media