When Barack Obama became the first African American President of the United States of America on November 4th 2008, most Africans were very ecstatic about his election. They thought, rather naively, that since a black man was at the helm of the most powerful country in the world, he would use his privilege to carve out a foreign policy which would advance African interests and promote world peace and justice. This has not happened as expected. Today, Africa is not better off with Obama around, nor have conflict spots in the world reduced. On the contrary, political events unfolding in Ukraine, Gaza, Syria, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and Egypt suggest that something is terribly wrong with the present world order – and American imperialism is at the centre of it. The question, though, is this: Why should the world continue to exist by the dictates of American foreign policy? Why should the morality of the world be measured by American correctness?
To demonstrate the absurdities and contradictions in American foreign policy, let us give some examples and urge the world to make a radical shift away from American influences and dictates.
The Ukraine Crisis
The recent crisis in Ukraine can perhaps explain why the change to a new world order is an imperative. Every day, viewers around the globe are swamped with news about the MH17 crash victims in Ukraine, and the social-political-economic fallout of this terrible conflict which has set America, the European Union and Nato, up against Russia and the Ukrainian separatists who have been fighting for independence from Ukraine in the eastern part of their country. Ever since this horrible crash happened, the European Union and America have imposed economic sanctions against Russia for “supporting separatists” who they believe shot down MH17. But why is the West up against Russia?
To present a little background to this, let us go into history. America celebrated the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1990, which they interpreted as a triumph of capitalism and democracy over communism. Since then, America has been encouraging all the former USSR countries to ditch Russia and join NATO and the orbit of American influence. This has also been extended to Ukraine. America wants to have her military arsenal, through NATO, to be on the doorsteps of Russia. America wants a weak Russia, not a resurgent Russia with its oil and gas, military high-tech, and economic might. This would be too much a “threat” for America. America wants a Russia that will not control shale gas reserves in Ukraine, or gas supplies in Central Europe. The battle for the control of oil and gas, and the routes, continues to define American attitudes to Russia. America is also controlled by some Jews who passionately hate Russia and want Russia’s influence in global affairs diminished.
And to achieve this, the Americans and Europeans supported a coup d’état against a pro-Russian, democratically, elected president (Yanukovich,) who refused to sign an integration agreement with the European Union last November, but instead opted for a bailout from Moscow. The EU countries and America did not condemn a coup; they welcomed it. However, when some regions in Eastern Ukraine expressed their opposition to the new Ukrainian president, and their desire to join Russia, or declare unilateral independence from Ukraine, the West did not like it. They have instead recognised a coup leader against the norms of democracy – which they pretend to preach.
Other the other hand, Russia has every reason to fear Ukraine which is pro-West, just as the Americans would be horrified by pro-Moscow Mexico, or a Cuba with Russian missiles in Havana. Nor would Obama be smiling if Russia encouraged the secession of American states from the Federal control. Therefore, how can a superpower such as Russia coexist with a Ukrainian regime which is pro-NATO and pro-West? That’s not fair on the Russians, because America would also not like to live with a Cuba that has Russian missiles pointed against American cities. This is just a question of security.
Again, the rule of natural justice tells us that those that are alleged to have committed an offence, be given an opportunity to be heard in the courts of law. This is the cornerstone of western justice systems. Yet contrary to all reason, the US president, Barack Obama and other leading American political figures, have since pointed an accusing finger at Russia for shooting down MH 17. They have pressured the West to impose economic sanctions against Moscow. However, investigations are yet to establish what caused the crash, and who was responsible.
The Middle East
In the recent past, we have witnessed war between Hamas and Israel army in Gaza, the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), as well as the sectarian violence in Libya and Egypt. Although the forces and historical reasons which have produced and shaped such a bewildering myriad of events in the Middle East are many, varied, and extremely complex, it is correct to suggest that America and the West have played a significant role in the creation of chaos and the human suffering in the region.
In the 1990s, the American government sanctioned a military invasion of Iraq, with Britain, France, Italy and other Nato countries, on the sidelines, on the pretext that the Iraq president Saddam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction. A huge military operation was mobilised: Saddam was overthrown and hanged, and the Americans supervised elections in Iraq. As expected, the Americans had lied; Saddam Hussein did not possess Weapons of Mass Destruction, nor have such ever been discovered in Iraq. The whole thing was just a smoke screen to destroy a country and access cheap oil. But what benefits has this invasion brought to the people of Iraq? Nothing except death, destruction, political instability and a civil strife that has set ethnic groups such as Sunni, Shia, and Kurds against each other. Today, Iraq cannot be said to be better off without Saddam Hussein.
Again, these same Western countries, supported by the toothless United Nations, invaded Libya, on the pretext that Muammar Gaddafi’s forces had shot protestors. They organised militias, invaded Libya and overthrew Gaddafi’s regime. Two years down the line, the Libyans are fighting against each other and the country has become a failed state. Given this sectarian turmoil, Libyans are not better off today without Ghaddafi. Democracy, as promised by the Americans, is again a farfetched dream. Yet the West has gained access to Libyan oil and gas.
In Egypt, America and Western countries supported a coup against Egypt’s Mohamed Morsi and the Moslem Brotherhood in 2013. Why did the West not speak vehemently against the Egyptian military and impose sanctions, if they truly believe in democracy? The answer is that the government of Morsi – which is moslem – threatened their commercial interests in Egypt, and nothing which threaten Western interests survives. But couldn’t they wait for the next elections in Egypt, at least? Again – hell no.
In Gaza, we have witnessed a genocide unfolding right before our eyes. Every day, the Israeli army has carried out sea, air and ground strikes against Hamas. In most instances, the victims of this war have been civilians. In spite of this outrageous, destruction of human life and property, no American and European Union leader has ever lifted a finger against the Jewish State. On the other hand, all blame Hamas and the Palestinian authority for this tragedy of unimaginable proportions. And yet history bears the truth of how the state of Israel was created in 1948. Prior to this date, there was NO Israel, but Palestine, and it beats all imagination that even if Israel has since been created, no sovereign and independent state for Palestinians has since been allowed to exist by America and the West.
The question is – Why? Again, it all comes to the priority of American and Western interests above everything else. For Americans and the West, the world should exist to serve their interests, and what they say is always correct. They have little regard for international law and conventions, as the only interests which they hold dear, as American, is the pathological preservation of Jews and the Israeli state, at the expense of Palestinians, Arabs and world peace. But how can a world be run like this?
A New World Order
Ever since the first black slaves were taken from the coast of Africa and transported to Europe and the Americas, the rapacious habit of Western capitalism to extract human labour, and other resources for the benefit of America and Western countries has continued unabated. The world has watched in horror, how America sponsored wars and regime changes in Africa, South America and the Middle East, to gain commercial privileges and advantage. The West have controlled the financial world and trade for the last 400 years, and the West have used their economic and political muscle to suppress the rights and privileges of other countries and peoples. Yet this world order, in which the only interests and viewpoints that should exist are those of the West, cannot go on forever unchallenged. It is safe to suggest that the larger world is tired of the kind of world order in which only Western interests, values and standards are upheld and promoted as “correct”. This world belongs to everyone, and everyone has the right to live in it without the force of threats and coercion from anyone.
But what does the new world order really mean? Well, to recall the past, the world of Woodrow Wilson and Winston Churchill, who put forward idealistic proposals for global governance in resolving world conflicts and challenges beyond nation-states, expected that their tools of governance, such as the United Nations and NATO, and the Bretton Woods system and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), were to be used in order to maintain the balance of power in favour of the United States, regularize cooperation between nations, and to promote and preserve capitalism. This arrangement has, however, caused so much suffering around the globe because few nations, led by the United States, have greater access to world oil, water, minerals, food and other critical resources. This privileged position has been man-made.
De-Dollarisation of the World Order
Over 60 percent of the world business and reserves are conducted in US dollars. This means that the USA has a tremendous advantage over any other country in the world. However, the 2008 financial crisis, the aggressive US foreign policy and sanctions against other nations, have taught the world a big lesson: holding assets and reserves in dollars, as well as over exposure to the dollar can be very risky. For example, China owns about 1.3 trillion of US debt; therefore, a number of countries, such as Iran, Russia and China, are already in the process of de-dollarising their economies. “De-dollarisation” simply means transacting with other countries in other currencies except the dollar, and holding wealth in another reserve currency other than the dollar.
The consequences of this action would be immense on the US economy. Since the dollar is held as the reserve currency in the world economy – and it also happens to be a currency that the US central bank – it means the Federal Reserve Board can run any amount of current account deficit on its balance of payments, and simply print notes to pay for it. This applies to whether other countries, who want to earn some interest on dollar assets such as American Treasury Bills or American government bonds, move to holding Treasury Bills or bonds; the US can still run any amount of current account deficit by printing more money.
If, however, “de-dollarisation” takes effect, then the ability of the US to run whatever current deficit it wishes to will be undermined. If the US still runs a current account deficit that is larger than what other countries are willing to hold as extra reserves, then the printing of more dollars than anybody is willing to hold, would cause a collapse in the value of the dollar. It means other nations will hold wealth in other forms such as commodities. On the other hand, if the US reduces its current account deficit to tally what other countries are able to hold as extra reserves, then its ability to absorb goods will shrink, causing a socially-explosive drop in living standards of its population and a loss of its military supremacy. Since it is the leading imperialist power of the world, such a loss of military might has serious consequences.
In each case, de-dollarisation will entail a severe crisis and destabilisation in the entire capitalist world, and will lead to the loss of the US hegemony. The US has not told its citizens the truth – they have been living on borrowed money, on a bubble, on an illusion.
Yet in the recent past months, countries such as China, France and Russia have reportedly been de-dollarising their financial markets: executing plans that will help their economies trade in their currencies. There is something more; India, Russia, South Africa, China and Brazil (BRICS) have formed two $100bn BRICS finance organs for funding new roads, power plants and other schemes in emerging economies.
“BRICS share one common goal in that they have all voiced objections to the dollar as the principal reserve currency and the impact of US Federal Reserve policy on emerging markets, which the Fed pays very little attention to,” they said at a meeting held in Fortaleza, Brazil, between July 15-16 summit.
“By shifting its policies, the Fed massively affects foreign currencies and makes it difficult for them to plan investments. BRICS members share a desire to end dollar hegemony…”
The days of the Dollar have come to an end
The world without the West is possible. The world without the dollar is becoming a reality. This is because unequal trade between the West and the rest of the world has bred poverty and destitution in the majority of the population, while a few – who think they are very clever – live rich lives. However, this scenario has inspired idea of change.
The desire for change has also been aroused by the aggressive foreign policy of the USA. Through lies, hypocrisy, contradictions as well as blatant injustices against others, the Americans have ended up creating a cadre of countries and peoples who have stood up against western hegemony.