From: Jurriaan Bendien (adsl675281@TISCALI.NL)
Date: Sat Feb 17 2007 - 14:30:44 EST
Just a quick ideological scan, in between other things. I think I have finally discovered a way to understand the "method in the madness" of US foreign policy, though don't hold your breath. It's a devastatingly simple, unified theory: a fear of the vacuum. A vacuum could appear, and it could be filled by, or suck in, anybody at all. It's a kind of metaphysical theory, yes, but Mr Bush has reiterated that fear in numerous speeches recently. To explain, here's an example of what Mr Bush says: "Mindful of recent history, I ask you to think about what happened in Afghanistan. In the 1980s, the United States helped Afghan freedom fighters drive the Soviet Red Army from Kabul, and once the Soviets withdrew, we decided our work was finished and left the Afghans to defend [sic] for themselves. Soon the terrorists moved in to fill the vacuum. They took over the country; they turned it into a safe haven from which they planned and launched the attacks of September the 11th. If we leave Iraq before the job is done, the terrorists will move in and fill the vacuum, and they will use that failed state to bring murder and destruction to freedom-loving nations." http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/03/20060329-6.html Sometimes, however, there is not just one vacuum, but several: "If we were to leave this young democracy before the job is done, there would be chaos, and out of chaos would become vacuums, and into those power vacuums would flow extremists who would be emboldened; extremists who want to find safe haven." http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/02/20070215-1.html The vacuum thus arises out of a chaos, and it causes a flowing movement (a bit like currents in the air or the sea), that can suck in all the wrong people: "And the reason why I say "disastrous consequences," the Iraqi government could collapse, chaos would spread, there would be a vacuum, into the vacuum would flow more extremists, more radicals, people who have stated intent to hurt our people." http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/02/20070214-2.html Bush thus says quite consistently that the new strategy in Iraq would mean "the [Iraqi] government will have the breathing space it needs to make progress in other critical areas." http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/01/20070110-7.html If there is a vacuum, you don't have that breathing space obviously, you cannot breathe. Still, some differences of interpretation remain. In the case of Mr Snow, the suction of the vacuum clearly appears if US troops LEAVE Iraq: MR. SNOW: (...) And we think when the American people not only receive a presentation of what's going on in Iraq and how it fits into the larger war on terror, but also the simple question, if not this, what -- I think it not only sets the basis for -- Q It's not "if what," it's to get out. That's the "what." MR. SNOW: No, no, I'm afraid not, because if you leave and create a vacuum you really do -- Q There are people there, they've lived there 5,000 years. MR. SNOW: Yes, I'll rehearse the -- you understand the geopolitical argument. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/01/20070118-1.html However, in the case of Kenneth M. Pollack, Director of Research, Saban Center for Middle East Policy, the suction of the vacuum was CREATED by the US military and its allies: "The problem was that we created a security vacuum. The United States pulled down the Iraqi government, pulled down the Iraqi security services. We did nothing to replace them. And what we've seen elsewhere in history is exactly what we've seen in Iraq, which is that in the presence of a security vacuum, in the absence of a government or some other force capable and willing to provide security, vicious militias arise." http://www.cfr.org/publication/12513/ Whatever else you might say, it is not as though intelligent people aren't thinking about the vacuum controversy. The vacuum problem turns out to be quite a tricky one, because you could create a vacuum by doing something, but also by not doing something, and before you know it, things and people are being sucked in. It makes political behaviour very complex. How for example did Afghanis get their arms, enabling them to fill a vacuum when the Russians pulled out, then switching from freedom fighters into terrorists? From the USA, as Mr Bush admits. So you might think you are plugging vacuum here, but then a vacuum appears there. In fact, while plugging one vacuum, you might create another, so you're in business for a long time. The quest to restore order in the chaos becomes elusive: you keep running around trying to plug new vacuums, it's a permanent battle really. There could moreover be different vacuums, for example "power vacuums" or "security vacuums" as mentioned above, and one vacuum might change into another, a power vacuum could mutate into a security vacuum. In the end you need a vacuum expert, to work out just exactly what kind of vacuum you are really dealing with, and how to deal with it. Whatever the case, when a vacuum appears, you have to plug it somehow, and you have to keep it plugged, until there's no more vacuum. Sure, I admit this is a metaphysical theory of geopolitics, not a scientifically proven one, but the advantage of it is, that it explains everything, which is what metaphysical theories do. How does this relate to global warming, for instance? Well, for a start, global warming, by changing the weather patterns and sea currents, creates all kinds of new vacuums and suction in the atmosphere, the sea and on land. You could also validly argue that global warming is caused by existing vacuums, but then again, you could validly argue it creates new vacuums. Whichever way you look at it though, point is the vacuums are there, and they need to be plugged. Thinking it through, we are going to be faced with an eternal reality that requires eternal vigilance. You cannot avoid those vacuums, and you cannot avoid having to do something about them. Oh no, do I hear a giant sucking sound somewhere? Well anyway, I have to get on with my life, I still have some vacuum cleaning to do myself, that I didn't get around to. One thing is fairly certain: if I switch my vacuum cleaner on, it will suck. If I switch it off, it stops sucking. That inspires confidence already. And I did it myself. Jurriaan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Feb 28 2007 - 00:00:08 EST