Janus U.S. policy

Janus U.S. policyWe often hear about the policy double standards, carried out by individual countries. That still must be aware of for this term? — Policy double standards usually called the situation in which a score of 1-st and the same phenomenon, process or action taking place in international relations, is dependent on the nature of the relationship of the parties assessing the objects valuation. When a similar filling the essential, the acts of some states receive support and justification, but in others — are condemned and punished.

A striking example of the introduction of double standards U.S. policy over the last year has given their assessment of the situation in Bahrain in February and March 2011, which had all the features supported by the Yankees so revolutionary motive so called Arab Spring. At first glance, the country has evolved usual for all the Arab revolutions, a situation in which most of the population comes into conflict with the ruling elite, representing commonly defined social minority: the military-oligarchic in Tunisia and Egypt, tribal — to consolidate around Gaddafi his clan tribes in Libya, religious — Alawite government in Syria. In Bahrain, as a situation in which the country's Shiite majority has opposed the ruling Sunni minority in the country, controlling and distributing among themselves the lion's share of municipal revenues, causing discontent Shiites. Following constantly claimed principles of democracy and equality, the United States would seem to have had most of the insurgent people of Bahrain full support, but this did not work for the simple reason that the folding in Bahrain revolutionary situation, as opposed to a revolutionary situation, say, in Egypt, does not meet the interests of the U.S. and its ally the head of the Persian Gulf — Saudi Arabia. So Makar, Arab Spring in Bahrain and ended before it began, so that in every way contributed to the Saudi police force.

The apotheosis of the mercantilist policies double standards USA was the death of Gaddafi, who not so long ago shook the hand of the South American president, who, by the way, Gaddafi himself is not called by the other as a "son." With the introduction of "no-fly zone" over Libya, to put it simply the beginning of the bombing of the country in February 2011, the Americans struggled trumpeted throughout the world on how the Libyan despot Muammar Gaddafi suppressed the Libyan people by restricting their right to free speech, and the company freedom of peaceful assembly, the right to independently determine the political future of their country.

While Gaddafi and his associates have been taught to respect democracy with air strikes and the hands of traitors and rebels, the police continued U.S. crackdown on demonstrations, using water cannons all this democratic and freedom-loving rubber bullets. It is clear that the dispersal of the demonstration in Oakland (CA) were used against civilians, even so called "non-lethal grenades" — in other words, chemical tool specially designed to disperse mass protests — the invention of U.S. intelligence to combat unwanted reactions of their own people. The use of grenades stuffed with combat poisons CN and CS, can lead to the most disastrous consequences. Remorseless American police is very difficult to justify: South American participants in the acclaimed international action "Occupy Wall Street!", Of course, were not set up any hard against the police or against the government or against other citizens. They did not resist the police and did not prepare for a mess, did not seal bottles with Molotov cocktails, even after the democratic U.S. government sanctioned mass arrests.

Someone can make a fair objection, saying that where-where, and in their locality Americans can do whatever they want — it is their internal affair. In the end, the army to disperse the demonstrations are not enticed. Well, it's hard to accept, if any one event. An example of the appeal of the U.S. authorities to its citizens in the process of suppression of protests in the last year the shares to "capture together!" Does not fit in with the attitude exhibited by the United States to the concept of civilian protest actions in other countries.

Double standards are manifested both in solving domestic problems of the United States and in foreign policy. Obvious examples of policy double standards U.S. policy in recent years has been the recognition of the bandit country of Kosovo, continuing to this day provocations on the independence of the so-called Ichkeria, discussions about "the need to preserve the territorial integrity of Georgia's young democracy" — in this regard the South American politics double standards done quite openly and clearly, boldly.

Like this post? Please share to your friends: