No sign NATO governments and Western media will change their warlike minds after AfghanistanDesaster

After the failure of the attempt to continue selling imperial wars to control the "gas station of the world" as wars for democracy, there is no sign that the West will move away from its war course. On the contrary, it is just starting new wars in Africa and concentrating the USA on direct confrontation with China and Russia, after their chances are dwindling to be able to force them to continue to accept the domination of the USA over the possibility of cutting off raw materials from the Near and Middle East (West Asia).


After the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, there is no reason for peace activists to sit back complacently because their warnings about war have been exactly confirmed. The U.S. and European nations are in the process of placing new troops in the resource-rich Congo and at the gas field in northern Mozambique. European politicians want to deploy new combat troops. So is this just a matter of shifting the center of gravity of the war to areas where it is believed that it will be easier to assert oneself militarily in, say, Africa? When the former security adviser Bolton was presented on German television with the interpretation of Biden's statement that Biden no longer wanted to wage wars, he protested: Biden had in no way said that.


And in Ukraine, tensions on Russia's border are heightened by new U.S. arms deliveries. More and more forces are being massed off China's coast. Let's not forget: just a few weeks ago, U.S. President Trump declared that war against China is more than likely. The withdrawal from Afghanistan could easily be justified by the fact that U.S. policy will now focus on directly defeating China and Russia.


The war in Afghanistan was the beginning of the war to control the resource-rich Middle East (West Asia). It was possible to construct a connection with Afghanistan via bin Laden's whereabouts that had not been so easily made to the actual target of intervention, Iraq. That is why U.S. policy took a roundabout route. The goal was to control the "gas station of the world", on which China, Japan or the EU also depend. By controlling this region through submissive regimes, military bases or militias, the U.S. hoped to permanently secure its global dominance against any possible competitor. The partial failure of these plans now makes a direct confrontation of the U.S. with Russia and China even more likely: The U.S. powers represented by both major parties do not want to give up their global supremacy They are, however, losing relative strength every day with the growing economic power of China: The economic power was and is ultimately also the basis of political and military strength. The trillions spent by U.S. policy on interventions have increased China's relative strength even more: it has been able to put its resources into modernizing the economy and providing social security for the people, while in the U.S. social cuts, also to finance armaments, have divided U.S. society and nation ever more deeply.


The humanity brings this development - the failure of the protection of the US supremacy over the control of the "gas station of the world" in even greater danger and in view of the nuclear war danger, this time the whole humanity, also the populations of the western states. This is also an opportunity for people from the global South, who have been mainly affected by the wars so far, to now get stronger support from people from the global North and for a truly globally cooperating peace movement to emerge. In the South, the "Western-led war on terror" has taken the lives of millions, maimed and traumatized many, destroyed many of their cities, homes, roads and factories, left behind mined and radioactively contaminated land, made tens of millions refugees and deprived millions of their possessions.


They have also been affected by these wars before, usually without larger segments of society being aware of it:

To justify withdrawing troops from Afghanistan, President Biden had to bring to light some of the devastation affecting U.S. citizens themselves: Biden acknowledged in his speech that 18 veterans commit suicide every day in the United States. Every day, he said, the war cost U.S. citizens $300 million alone. The loss suffered by the families of the fallen will never go away. The future medical and disability costs of those who served in the wars will run into the billions. For decades to come, the citizens of the U.S. and other participating Western countries will have to repay the loans taken out for the wars (and the

interest paid to the wealthy who gave the loans. And also the

terrorist threat is now really no longer just a pretext for war, but has become real as a result of the wars: If there were 400 violent jihadists in 2001 at the start of the intervention, there are 20,000 today and in many countries around the world. The many uninvolved victims and their relatives have driven many directly into the arms of groups who believe that this can only be ended with violence against the West.


Those who do not want to give up the Western domination, which is the basis for the unjust - the West-favoring world order - will continue to focus on armament, because they have only the military card left for it in the face of the growing power of China. The wealthy and their banks are earning handsomely from their investments in the arms industry as well as in the raw material production areas they can control.


Nevertheless, the Afghanistan disaster, so admitted by all, offers a great opportunity:


The interventions were politically feasible only because they were presented to Western publics, who normally oppose war but support human rights and especially women's rights, as necessary to enforce human rights.


The political minorities who follow the interventions have known for many years that this has not succeeded anywhere. But the majority has not learned from the media that the situation in Libya, Somalia, Syria, Iraq has become much much worse because of the interventions, including women's rights and religious freedom.


The chance is that the Western defeat in Afghanistan has now made that more visible to the majority of the population.


Hopefully, many will now understand that the people of each country - as we in the West have generally done in our history - can only enforce human rights themselves in our countries. They can be supported in this by peaceful means, but the best way is to have their own model of society that is good for their own populations and that people in other countries can recognize as good and worthy of imitation for themselves as well.


After also Biden or in Germany Minister Maas admit that their argument to be able to create democratic nations by force does not work, it should be easier to unite all people who are against war and violence and for human rights.


After the Nuremberg judgment, this was actually already historically clarified: the war of aggression is the worst breach of human rights, because it brings all other human rights violations after it.


Politicians, like Trump, who have always declared that they only represent national interests and therefore only want to use their army for direct control of raw materials (like oil wells in Syria), for example, but not for global human rights, should now be easier to isolate.


Let us use the opportunity of the experience from Afghanistan to build social majorities for the goals that were actually agreed upon in the UN Charter in 1945 and in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948: Banish wars, resolve conflicts by peaceful means, show solidarity worldwide so that everyone can live in dignity. If we can free up the funds that are still being spent on armaments and wars, we have a real chance to do this, especially now that it is becoming clear how many trillions of dollars have been wasted that could have taken us a long way along this path: Also in stopping climate change, which is massively amplified by armament and war: This should also enable us to join forces with the environmental movement.




Wolfgang Lieberknecht, International PeaceFactory Wanfried

28 Ansichten0 Kommentare

Aktuelle Beiträge

Alle ansehen