Whose world is it?
.
During President George W Bush's state of the union speech, he boldly pronounced that if Saddam Hussein does not comply with US demands, then the United States government will invade Iraq in order to secure the "peace of the world."
When nearly the entire world is against an invasion of Iraq, it begs the question, "Whose world is it?"
If the Bush administration considered all people and governments on this planet to be part of this world, then instead of threatening unilaterally to invade Iraq, the US would attempt to build a real coalition through diplomacy, not through threatening rhetoric, warning the world that the "course of this nation does not depend on the decisions of others."
Loyalist nations such as Great Britain and incredibly tiny, highly dependent states such as Qatar, Bahrain, and the United Arab Emirates, who are easily bribed by US dollars, do not constitute a "coalition."
The United States is embarking on a new form of colonialism and President Bush's recent speech sends a strong signal to sovereign nations that the country has completely abandoned a policy of multilateralism.
.
During President George W Bush's state of the union speech, he boldly pronounced that if Saddam Hussein does not comply with US demands, then the United States government will invade Iraq in order to secure the "peace of the world."
When nearly the entire world is against an invasion of Iraq, it begs the question, "Whose world is it?"
If the Bush administration considered all people and governments on this planet to be part of this world, then instead of threatening unilaterally to invade Iraq, the US would attempt to build a real coalition through diplomacy, not through threatening rhetoric, warning the world that the "course of this nation does not depend on the decisions of others."
Loyalist nations such as Great Britain and incredibly tiny, highly dependent states such as Qatar, Bahrain, and the United Arab Emirates, who are easily bribed by US dollars, do not constitute a "coalition."
But the Bush administration, and much of the US government in general, believes that the world is best controlled by the United States. This is the same belief that fueled the long and brutal history of colonialism. European colonial masters claimed that the countries of Africa, Asia and the Americas could not rule themselves; that the colonial masters knew what was best for their colonies.
Today, we seem to be witnessing an attempt at a new form of colonialism, this time by the United States. The Bush administration is saying that the US knows what is best for the "peace of the world," and will take whatever actions are necessary to achieve this, even if nearly every country disagrees.
Colonial outposts
The US, much like the Roman Empire, has already built colonial outposts all over the map, especially after the Sept 11 attacks.
In the Middle East, due to the Gulf War and the current threat on Iraq, military bases have sprouted up in Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Bahrain, Oman, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait. If the administration launches an attack on Iraq, then new military bases will be built in that country, too.
After the US interventions in Bosnia and Kosovo, military bases were established throughout the Balkans, especially the gigantic military base in southeastern Kosovo known as Camp Bondsteel.
The invasion of Afghanistan has led to the creation of military bases in that war-torn country and, more importantly, all throughout Central Asia.
In Central Asia, the Bush administration has built or is using bases in Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. These bases reach as far as the eastern tip of Central Asia on China's western border.
The proliferation of US military bases and US influence does not end at China. on the other side of the Asian nation, the military bases begin again. Complementing the current bases in Japan and South Korea, US troops have moved back into the Philippines, after a ten-year absence.
Therefore, the US looks to be very much like a modern day global colonial empire. The United States has military bases stretching from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean. 
This is why most of the world is against any US. invasion of Iraq. To the world, an invasion of Iraq is similar to the marching of the Roman imperial army; no nation wants the US to be able to invade any country it chooses against the world's objections.
The idea of a government taking unilateral military action is what the rest of the world considers a "rogue state."
Strong signal
This is why Bush's statement, "the course of this nation does not depend on the decisions of others," sends a strong signal to sovereign nations that the US has completely abandoned a policy of multilateralism and has entered a new stage of unilateralism, which increasingly looks like a newfound US nationalism. This nationalism also has strong undertones of moral and cultural elitism which further infuriates other countries.
n addition to offending and marginalising our allies, Bush's speech sent a clear signal to US rivals, most importantly China, that the only way to protect their country against US imperial threats is by amassing a military that can compete with the US.
If the US is not willing to consider the concerns of other nations, and openly states that US policy is necessary for the "peace of the world," it has become clear to the rest of the world that the US will shape the planet in any way it desires; it is clear that the "peace of the world" is now synonymous with US interests. It looks as if the beginning of the 21st century is going to change the course of recent history.
The idea of a positive, cultural globalisation - the cooperation between all countries in the world for a combined goal - may have been dealt its deathblow.
The irony of it all is that this quickly emerging, fragmented world order is more than for what even Osama bin Laden could have hoped. - YellowTimes
Ash Pulcifer, a lifelong activist for international human rights, lives in the United States. Ash finds it unacceptable that the world often turns its back to those less fortunate members of our species who are forced to endure poverty and civil strife.
