I do not believe that Billary will become the US President (the thought itself 
is funny and chilly!!). Every  new  administration likes to claim a "major" 
foreign affairs accomplishment - it might be Kosovo. But, it also means that 
nothing major will change in the status of Kosmet until 2009 if ever! boba
 

  http://en.fondsk.ru/article.php?id=1105
07.12.2007
 
Leonid IVASHOV
What We Should Expect From Hillary Clinton
 
Hillary Clinton, the wife of the former US President Bill Clinton and a 2008 
presidential race favorite recently unveiled her international politics agenda 
in a paper in Foreign Affairs. (Hillary Rodham Clinton. Security and 
Opportunity for the Twenty-first Century. Foreign Affairs, November/December, 
2007). The publication provides a fairly critical account of a number of 
aspects of G. Bush's presidency. 
A wind of change in the US foreign politics? Hardly so. The analysis of the 
criticism directed at the Republican Administration by H. Clinton and of the 
plans drawn in her paper shows that no radical changes in Washington's global 
strategy can be expected in the foreseeable future. 
What H. Clinton criticizes G. Bush and his administration for is by no means 
their tendency towards global dominance or the underlying strategy formulated 
by the US Congress in 2005 as «gaining an unobstructed access to the world's 
key regions, strategic communications, and global resources» (in other words, 
gaining control over all of the above). 
The US quest for global hegemony has persisted for over a century. Only methods 
do evolve. Whereas Rear Admiral A. Mahan, a prominent late XIX-century US 
geostrategist, emphasized the importance of the sea power, military activity, 
and the strategy of strangling Eurasian continental powers in the «anaconda 
coils», US President W. Wilson espoused the idea of a «peaceful» partition of 
rival countries and their subsequent occupation. US President W. Taft suggested 
using the US dollar as the instrument of subduing other nations. The common 
elements of those strategies were both the idea of the US global dominance and 
the notion that Russia had to be chosen as the prime target of such efforts. 
H. Clinton's approaches to international issues are not essentially new. This 
is no surprise – her foreign politics advisors – M. Albright and S. Talbott – 
are the authors of the US aggression against Serbs. 
Continuity is an indispensable trait of the US foreign politics. B. Clinton's 
presidency was marked by a powerful NATO and US attack on Yugoslavia. The 
course taken by his successor G. Bush envisions «a peaceful resolution» of the 
Balkan crisis. The partition of the former Yugoslavia continues in the form of 
the separation of first the Montenegro, and, as the next step, Kosovo from 
Serbia. 
If elected, H. Clinton intends to do the same in Iraq. Currently, she is 
leveling criticism at G. Bush for the US military involvement in the country, 
but this should not be taken too seriously. Similarly, G. Bush criticized B. 
Clinton for Yugoslavia while being the presidential contender. This political 
ping-pong is a game routinely played by the US Republicans and Democrats. No 
doubt, in case H. Clinton makes it to the White House in 2008, she will bring 
to the completion the ongoing process of partitioning Iraq into three minor 
pseudo-independent states. Such is the general logic of the US global strategy 
implemented regardless of who is the current President. 
H. Clinton stresses that leadership is «based on respect more than fear», while 
also explaining that «there is a time for force and a time for diplomacy». In 
other words, initially the US interests must be promoted with the help of 
civilian means (as it was in the case of S. Milosevic), and later comes the 
time to resort to force (as in the cases of Serbs, Iraqis, etc). 
H. Clinton's loud phrases concerning the peace plan for Iraq and the withdrawal 
of the US troops from the country are immediately offset by the statement that 
«...we will have to replenish American power by getting out of Iraq, rebuilding 
our military, and developing a much broader arsenal of tools in the fight 
against terrorism». The reasoning is the same as that of G. Bush. Consequently, 
we should expect to see point strikes against Al-Qaeda (a truly universal 
pretext) and some other terrorist groups, whose names are not hard to invent no 
matter what country is being dealt with. Consequently, US military bases will 
remain in the Iraqi Kurdistan even after their withdrawal from the southern and 
central parts of Iraq. By the way, G. Bush is already creating the 
infrastructure for deploying the US troops in Kurdistan, perhaps as a gift to 
give his successor. 
One can discern only minor divergences in H. Clinton's and G. Bush's approaches 
to building up the US military might. 
For example: «... I will work to expand and modernize the military ... the Bush 
Administration has undermined this goal by focusing obsessively on expensive 
and unproven missile defense technology... ». Seeking any kind of international 
balance is not even considered – the plan is to pursue the absolute US military 
and technological superiority. The problem with G. Bush as seen by H. Clinton 
is solely that he has not done a sufficiently good job to that end. By the way, 
just recently, the predominantly Democratic US Congress allocated some extra 
$100 mln to create a space shuttle with a strike capability, which is going to 
hit targets from the space orbit at distances over 16,500 km. 
H. Clinton also pledges to raise the efficiency of the US intelligence 
community, to turn it into «a clandestine service that is out on the street, 
not sitting behind desks». Obviously, this refers to a focus on the operations 
abroad. H. Clinton clearly intends to use stick and carrot in dealing with 
Iran's nuclear program. Should Tehran refuse to accept the US terms, then no 
type of response will be ruled out. In this respect, there are no differences 
with the policy of the current Administration whatsoever. 
Finally, what's new in H. Clinton's approach to the Russian-US relations? Her 
opinion is that Russia is among the countries which «... are not adversaries 
but that are challenging the United States on many fronts». The contentious 
issues include Kosovo, the alleged use of fuel supplies as the political 
leverage against Russia's CIS neighbors, and Russia's trying the patience of 
the US and Europe in what concerns nonproliferation and arms control (the 
latter is a clear reference to Russia's freezing its participation in the 
Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE), which was defunct anyhow). 
And, of course, Mrs. Clinton criticizes V. Putin who has «suppressed many of 
the freedoms won after the fall of communism». She finds it inconceivable that 
Russia and the US might adhere to different interpretations of democracy and 
that Russia will never opt for the «US-style» democracy. Nevertheless, she is 
convinced that Russia should be engaged in resolving the international problems 
important to the US. Thus, the role reserved for Russia is that of an assistant 
(Moscow's having a strategy of its own must be something impossible to 
imagine). 
Speaking of H. Clinton's foreign relations agenda, one concludes that the US 
goals in international politics have not changed over decades. Therefore, it 
does not make a great difference who exactly moves into the White House. 
 
 
Post a comment
Hide form


      Connect with friends from any web browser - no download required. Try the 
new Yahoo! Canada Messenger for the Web BETA at 
http://ca.messenger.yahoo.com/webmessengerpromo.php

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



===============
Group Moderator: [Е-ПОШТА 
ЗАШТИЋЕНА] 
page at http://magazine.sorabia.net
for more informations about current situation in Serbia http://www.sorabia.net 
Slusajte GLAS SORABIJE nas talk internet-radio (Serbian Only)
http://radio.sorabia.net
 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sorabia/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sorabia/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[&#1045;-&#1055;&#1054;&#1064;&#1058;&#1040; 
&#1047;&#1040;&#1064;&#1058;&#1048;&#1035;&#1045;&#1053;&#1040;] 
    mailto:[&#1045;-&#1055;&#1054;&#1064;&#1058;&#1040; 
&#1047;&#1040;&#1064;&#1058;&#1048;&#1035;&#1045;&#1053;&#1040;]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [&#1045;-&#1055;&#1054;&#1064;&#1058;&#1040; 
&#1047;&#1040;&#1064;&#1058;&#1048;&#1035;&#1045;&#1053;&#1040;]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Одговори путем е-поште