For anyone with any appreciation of international issues and the importance that the United States has in the conduct of global affairs, the previous 8 years under George Bush and the Republicans has been an unmitigated disaster on every front conceivable. Voting for such a regime the first time around in 2000 was perhaps excusable (although the outcome of that election was at best, dubious), but to repeat the mistake again in 2004 was a damning indictment on either the US electoral system (again), or the American electorate, or probably both. The message that this re-election sent out to the rest of the world should have shamed Americans! The Bush regime’s behaviour has most certainly damaged the reputation of America, American values and those who share them, to such an extent that it is going to take at least a generation of greatly improved behaviour to undo all the damage that this regime has done. (I do not wish this to sound lecturing: I am just very concerned!)
The naivety and incompetence of the Bush regime has been staggering, with the debacle in Iraq crowning them all! In all my travels around the globe, I have almost never come across anyone (Westerner or local) who has had a good thing to say about the conduct of the American government, and not just in Iraq, but in Afghanistan, its approach to the UN, the drugs industry, international trade and aid, global warming, international relations, and now of course, to the economic mess that it leaves behind.
As a fellow Westerner, I share many of the same values that are (apparently) espoused by the American way of life. But I am ashamed and embarrassed to be associated with such a regime. In my travels, I take every opportunity to explain to non-Westerners that many of us do not support the decisions and conduct of this current regime and its lackeys (including Tony Blair’s UK government and John Howard’s Australian government); and that although we claim to live in democratic societies, many of us feel emancipated and excluded from many of the decisions that governments make, apparently in our name. Understandably, this is often a difficult challenge, given the manner in which many Western government lecture others to improve their governance. But I am constantly surprised and grateful at the level of patience and forgiveness that I have experienced from those to whom it is us who should be apologising!
American voters can of course, claim that the role of their President is to defend the interests of their country and this is indeed the case. Likewise, what the rest of the world thinks of them may not appear to be any of their concern. But I hope that the immense damage inflicted on America and its way of life (and values) by the current US government has made Americans better understand that like it or not, the views that the rest of the world has of their country and its ways of life DO matter to them, even if they never leave Hicksville in the Mid-West. We live in an increasingly integrated (and over-crowded) planet, in large part driven by the forces of globalisation that were unleashed by the American way. Whether we like it or not (and evidently, many do not like it), this means that we have to learn to get on with others whose values, cultures, customs and ways or life are different from our own. If not, then what is the alternative? Do we attempt to crush their ways of life, eradicate their customs or bomb them into submission? Evidently this seems to have been uppermost in many of the decisions made by the current Bush regime! Has not experience taught us that when people feel they are being coerced into something with which they do not agree, then sooner or later they will reject this?And that the more forcefully we try to suppress their freedom to express and be themselves, the more violently will be the reaction?
Ultimately, if we wish to modify the behaviour of others, then quiet diplomacy, gentle encouragement and humility will always be more effective than intransigence and blind dogmatic force. Unfortunately, this alternative approach takes longer to achieve and grabs fewer headlines, but I see no realistic alternative in the long term. As an example, if instead of spending the gigantic sums of money on the war in Iraq, the US government had spent only a tiny fraction as much on providing instead safe drinking water for all Middle Eastern countries, how much more effective would that have been in propagating America’s standing in the region? How much more effective would that have been in spreading peace and goodwill towards the American way of life than the current approach, and undermine those who oppose it? Of course, this is not without its risks, but neither in the current approach.
Furthermore, the forces of globalisation are likely to hasten the rebalancing of geopolitical power from the affluent but relatively under-populated Western countries towards the far more numerous ‘developing’ countries. The current economic malaise spreading around the globe may well speed up this process. Few commentators doubt that in 50 – 100 years time, the USA and other West economies will no longer be the predominant economic (and hence political) powers in the world. Instead, it is probable that they will either have to share this with other countries such as China, India, Brazil and Russia, or worse (from the Western point of view), they will have relinquished their predominance altogether. In such an eventuality, Western countries will be less able to assert their values on others. In fact, they may be fighting a losing battle against superior but more unpalatable value systems. Unfortunately, given the attitudes that we currently adopt towards others, we will have little moral authority or goodwill to resist exactly the same approach being taken towards us. When we are no longer in the driving seat, this will not be pleasant!
These ideas are directly relevant to the presidential choices facing American voters in the next few weeks (and in the future too). For anyone who agrees with any of the above, the choice of whom to vote for should be crystal clear! The role of the Christian fundamentalists in the current Bush regime should be of as much concern as are Islamic (or Jewish, Hindu or other) fundamentalists are to any rational minded, free-thinking liberal. (And why I must ask, is being liberal considered to be a bad thing these days? Would we rather be governed by intransigent, narrow minded bigots?) The judgement of anyone who believes in Creationism in the face of all the evidence to the contrary should be of real concern! Likewise, anyone who advocates the continuing use of overwhelming military force as the way to solve multicultural, multiethnic issues should not be leading anything more than a small dog! These attitudes are not conducive to the open-minded tolerance or flexibility that leaders need in today’s integrated world.
Unfortunately, no individual can control the global issues that face us today. But we desperately need a leader for the world’s most powerful nation that can envisage an international future, and furthermore, communicate it effectively. Barack Obama is clearly far more qualified for both of these vital roles than is the Republican party. (I am absolutely amazed that after 8 years of Bush and the Republicans, this election has even been a contest. Are there that many voters in America who are so ignorant, bigoted or stupid?!) So, I (like most of the rest of the world), firmly nail my colours to the Obama mast!
I do however, also have a word of caution: the expectations placed on Obama after he is (hopefully) elected will be wholly unrealistic. The damage done over the last 8 years will take a long time and a lot of hard work to rectify. The important thing for the next president will be to set out a positive vision for the future (rather than the negative, fear based threatening with which we have alas, become all too familiar), inclusive for all (including the globally disadvantaged); and to communicate that effectively to all. Obama can do this, but it will be up to the rest of us to help make it happen. I wish him much luck and good fortune: he’ll be needing it!
No comments:
Post a Comment