1 - 7 November 2001
Issue No.558
|
Al-Ahram Weekly Online 1 - 7 November 2001 Issue No.558 |
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Current issue | Previous issue | Site map | ||
More than just a carry-on
America's new enemy is pushing all the wrong buttons. Mohamed Khaled Al-Azaar* wonders if this is the dawning of the age of multilateralism
The attack of 11 September reversed US fortunes in unthinkable ways, perhaps changing forever the American way of life. Buffered by two great oceans, the United States has often viewed the outside world as a distant playground, one in which it is entitled to set the rules. No more. A bloody Tuesday morning in September sent the world's greatest power back to earth, into a familiar but long-forgotten political landscape. Living a life of voluntary solitude is one thing. Being jolted out of it, against one's own volition, is another. US conduct after 11 September is bound to spawn an avalanche of research and analysis, for it sheds much light on a new era of international relations and a global order still in the making.
The United States has a unique position in the world system. The way it thinks and reacts to current events is bound to leave an indelible mark on the world. The kinds of choices it is making, particularly as far as international reciprocity is concerned, are becoming more evident. US policy was once made from a vantage point of self-sufficiency, with the sense that America could choose its enemies and allies as it pleased. Confident of its massive geographic, economic, scientific, and military potential, the United States was used to having an incredible edge over all the members of the international community, big and small. No one was big enough to stand up to it. Most wanted only to please, or at least not contradict its decisions.
The collapse of the Soviet Union and the disintegration of the socialist bloc reinforced this sense of invincibility, of overwhelming advantage over friend and foe. Elated by its solitary superpower role, the United States felt its vision of the world had been fulfilled, and believed that others would follow, sooner or later, in its tracks. Its confidence was such that President George W Bush, only six months in office, shut out the world and went off to enjoy a one-month holiday. To Bush it did not matter much that in his brief sell in office, he had already alienated four major fronts: China (espionage), Russia (the missile shield), the Middle East (condoning Sharon's bullying of the Palestinians), and Iran (backing off on dialogue).
Even friends and allies were not spared. The US alienated Europe and Japan in Kyoto. Durban saw the Americans fire the diplomatic equivalent of a parting shot. The lack of remorse with which they stormed out of the anti-racism conference speaks volumes about its self-image as a country that did not need, or try, to please. Washington was telling the world: you can do it the easy way, or you can do it the hard way, but you can't win.
Then everything changed. Washington could no longer afford the luxury of unilateral decisions, of telling everyone what to do and how to do it. Once scornful of international pleas, it is now scurrying about for allies and support. Interdependence has been restored. The oceans have narrowed. Multilateral politics is back in the saddle.
The change in tack was sudden, and drastic. Washington has been forced to make promises, grant wishes on an unforeseen scale, and trade heavily in political futures. For one thing, it has muted down its opposition to India's and Pakistan's acquisition of nuclear capabilities, even lifting the sanctions imposed on both countries in 1999. Is this the end of an era? And how will it affect the world? No longer is Washington worried about China's or Russia's human rights abuses. Will this "opportunistic" silence last, and how will it reflect on US policy elsewhere? Star Wars, the Strategic Defense Initiative -- all passé. Now that the enemy is pounding at the wrong gates, Washington's pet enemies, the so- called "rogue states," seem, in retrospect, predictable, if not outright benign.
Washington is eagerly promising a state for the Palestinians alongside Israel. Is the United States finally acquiring awareness of the international disaster it has helped create in the heart of the Middle East, or is it playing for time? For the past few weeks, Washington has been tirelessly repeating that the military campaign, with all its possible ramifications, is not directed against Islam or Muslims. But how can it sustain this claim once the mission against the Taliban and Bin Laden is over and the campaign shifts to Arab and Islamic targets? Besides, why does the US's terrorism shopping list not feature non- Arab, non-Islamic names?
Promises are political baggage, and the United States is not travelling light. Washington has made promises that run against the grain of conventional US policies. It will have to make serious changes of policy, or attempt a risky climb-down.
This also goes for the US domestic front. The crisis has given rise not only to security and military mobilisation, but also to what many see as a relapse in democratic standards and civil freedoms. Some observers go so far as to claim that the American way of life is a thing of the past, that the extraordinary measures taken since 11 September are there to stay: an indefinite state of affairs, in an indefinite war, against an indefinite enemy.
Speculations of this sort are not far-fetched. The anthrax is more than just a health hazard. Further precautions are likely, and will have an impact on civil freedoms. The US government has professed its commitment to democracy. Will this commitment hold in the face of an enemy that knows how to hide in the woodwork of freedom? Only time can answer that.
* The writer is a Cairo-based Palestinian analyst.
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
| ARCHIVES Letter from the Editor Editorial Board Subscription Advertise! |
WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg |
 Al-Ahram Organisation |
Recommend this page