by Prof. Viktor KREMENYUK, deputy director of
the Institute of the USA and Canada Studies of the Russian Academy of
Sciences
Moscow, 01 October 2002.
RIA "Novosti"
Especially
for ARTEL GEOPOLITIKA
The U.S. strategy of National Defence drafted by the Washington
administration seems to be an attempt to make the country's world hegemony a
legal right, to place the United States above the world community, to give it
the satus of a supreme judge who both issues a sentence and fulfils it.
The
truth is that the 35-page document openly discloses America's desire to become
the sole superpower - "the country's armed forces will always be strong enough
so that no other nation could not even try to rival the United States' military
potential." From now on, the United States will be the first to deliver blows
against any foe claiming the right to act independently and at its own
discretion.
Obviously enough, this is an attempt to put an end to the UN
Security Council as the main international body responsible for determining the
necessity and rightfulness of the use of force against that or another nation.
In fact, the USA claims that it no longer need the UN Security Council's
approval and now it will act evading this body, which the Americans proved three
years ago by delivering bomb strikes against Yugoslavia. Although the new
strategy considers terrorism "a mortal foe" of the United States and claims the
right to deliver pre-emptive strikes, it is clear that it is not about
terrorism, but about the U.S. unwillingness to bind itself by any international
obligations and its desperate desire to act at its own discretion in any
situation.
Many recent US actions which caused negative reaction throughout
the world testify to this fact. This refers to the US withdrawal from the Kyoto
agreement imposing limitations on each country's polluting emissions, its
unilateral withdrawal from the 1972 ABM Treaty, and a virtual collapse of the
Geneva Convention its has caused by refusing to consider the Taliban fighters
captured during the anti-terrorist operation in Afghanistan as POWs.
This
alarming tendency is now officially formalised in the recently drafted strategy.
It's hardly a coincidence that it was being developed simultaneously with yet
another remarkable event. George W. Bush has urged US Congress to revise and
limit the scope of the 1973 War Powers Act. In compliance with the Act, within a
month after the beginning of a military campaign the US president is to explain
to Congress the reasons for it and get a congressional approval. If Congress
finds the president's grounds unpersuasive, then the head of state is to stop
the military action he started. And now Bush wants to amend the Act so that the
president could unleash and wage war without the congressional consent. This
reveals the White House's determination to get out of the congressional control
both in (by amending the War Powers Act) and outside (by means of adopting the
new national defence strategy) the country. Taking into account the fact that US
Congress is highly likely to join the Bush cause to increase his war powers and
the fact that the new defence strategy does not require the congressional
approval at all, it is possible to conclude that the White House has its hands
free to get rid of any inconvenient regime anywhere.
Of course, this
primarily refers to Iraq and to a new campaign in the Persian Gulf which
Washington has been preparing for a long time. It is supposed to be the second
Desert Storm which, as the Pentagon thinks, will put an end to the most-hated
regime of Saddam Hussein.
The American attempt to make the UN Security
Council authorise the use of force against Iraq has failed. The Americans failed
to persuade either their allies or the rest of the world community that Iraq
really posed a threat to peace. In fact, Washington has no proof of Baghdad's
links to the al-Qaeda framework. Nor is there proof that Iraq is really
developing weapons of mass destruction - this can be confirmed by an
international inspection alone and Baghdad has already consented to readmit it.
And this implies that Washington will fail to obtain the UN approval of its war
against Iraq. But the United States wants to launch it anyway and the purpose of
the new US national defence strategy is to justify this campaign.
It will
not be an exaggeration to say that America is now plagued with chauvinism. The
first reason is that following the collapse of the Soviet Union the country felt
itself the sole superpower that no one can stop or criticise. However, there is
another reason. After September 11th, 2001, the Americans felt insulted.
The
World Trade Centre twin towers collapsed together with America's firm belief in
its invincibility and absolute safety. But it turned out that the mighty America
is helpless facing a bunch of terrorists. This very insult and an unexpected
sense of being helpless are a fruitful soil for belligerent patriotism. This is
extremely advantageous for those trying to prove that, anyway, America is the
most powerful and hence, has the right to do anything. But this is an error.
Rights of the strong are not a law yet. It is the trust of the whole
international community which ought not to be neglected that can make it be so.
