Sunday , November 24 2024
Home / Mike Norman Economics / Patrick Armstrong — Why the U.S. Seeks to Hem in Russia, China and Iran

Patrick Armstrong — Why the U.S. Seeks to Hem in Russia, China and Iran

Summary:
The bitter reality is that U.S. foreign policy has no definable objective other than blocking the initiatives of others because they stand in the way of the further expansion of U.S. global interests. This impoverished strategy reflects Washington’s refusal to accept the passing of its relatively brief post–Cold War moment of unipolar power.There is an error all too common in American public opinion. Personalizing Washington’s regression into the role of spoiler by assigning all blame to one man, now Donald Trump, deprives one of deeper understanding. This mistake was made during the steady attack on civil liberties after the Sept. 11 tragedies and then during the 2003 invasion of Iraq: namely that it was all George W. Bush’s fault. It was not so simple then and is not now. The crisis

Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important: , , ,

This could be interesting, too:

Matias Vernengo writes Podcast with about the never ending crisis in Argentina

Matias Vernengo writes Trumponomics vs. Bidenomics: The good, the bad and the stupid

Matias Vernengo writes Debt cycles and the long term crisis of neoliberalism

Matias Vernengo writes Keynes’ denial of conflict: a reply to Professor Heise’s critique

The bitter reality is that U.S. foreign policy has no definable objective other than blocking the initiatives of others because they stand in the way of the further expansion of U.S. global interests. This impoverished strategy reflects Washington’s refusal to accept the passing of its relatively brief post–Cold War moment of unipolar power.

There is an error all too common in American public opinion. Personalizing Washington’s regression into the role of spoiler by assigning all blame to one man, now Donald Trump, deprives one of deeper understanding. This mistake was made during the steady attack on civil liberties after the Sept. 11 tragedies and then during the 2003 invasion of Iraq: namely that it was all George W. Bush’s fault. It was not so simple then and is not now. The crisis of U.S. foreign policy—a series of radical missteps—are systemic. Having little to do with personalities, they pass from one administration to the next with little variance other than at the margins.

Let us bring some history to this question of America as spoiler. What is the origin of this undignified and isolating approach to global affairs?..
My quibble with the analysis is that it begins post WWII. The problem really begins with European imperialism and European rivalries, in particular between Britain and various Continental powers.  This lead to WWI and the terms of peace imposed at the instigation of Britain led to the rise of Hitler.

The British Empire was replaced with the Anglo-American Empire post WWII, and the outlook and agenda remains the same.

The big picture cannot be seen independently of European and American history, which includes global history owing to imperialism and colonialism. While the age of imperialism may be over, the age of empire is not. Imperialism and colonialism have morphed into neo-imperialism and neocolonialism, and this is on track for another great war — as previously in the Western tradition, which history reveals.


Consortium News
Why the U.S. Seeks to Hem in Russia, China and Iran
Patrick Armstrong
Mike Norman
Mike Norman is an economist and veteran trader whose career has spanned over 30 years on Wall Street. He is a former member and trader on the CME, NYMEX, COMEX and NYFE and he managed money for one of the largest hedge funds and ran a prop trading desk for Credit Suisse.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *