New World Order

When Grobachev tore down the Berlin wall, he took world order down with it. For over half a century the world had existed in a Bi-Polar Era. In the west, the United States and European powers championed the cause of capitalism while Communist Russia ruled the east. Over time the entire globe was divided amongst the great superpowers. When it finally came time for the end of the USSR the West was left in a lopsided world.

                A new era came forth, and as the only remaining superpower America assumed the role of globocop. Without Soviet Russia to occupy the incredible military might of the United States she instead turned her efforts to police the world. While American intentions may have been noble they have consistently accomplished two things, worsened foreign relations and increased national debts. Now with a global war on terror and economic peril steadily approaching, more and more Americans find themselves reminiscing of the cold war.

                And why shouldn’t they? If capitalism has taught us anything it is that the best results come from competition.  The competition that exists between companies drives innovation and expansion. Without an economic rival, complacency and decline become inevitable. International Relations are not much different. Without a clear rival, countries have no sense of unity. They have no driving force to excel but instead are forced to deal with growing domestic strife.

                Take Ancient Rome for example. After the fall of Carthage, Rome began to rapidly expand across the Ancient world. Without any serious competition their expansion was rapid and unstoppable, she experienced a golden age. However this greatness was short lived, as the roman people grew more powerful they no longer had a common goal in mind. Instead they turned to greed. A century of civil war gripped the republic ultimately leading to their demise.

                There is hope on the horizon though. After twenty years of undisputed global dominion the United States has true economic rivals. The Far East is well on their way to becoming an economic giant rivaling American dominance.  The two nations of China and India have both experienced massive growth in the 21^st century and have become major world players. As they age and grow into the new world today, a New World Order may be in its infancy. I can only hope for continued economic growth in the region and even stronger global influence.

                Americans may be distraught over their new rivals in the world but, I may remind them a few things. Firstly America has not always existed as the unrivaled superpower but rather as a competitor, she never lost a world war, she survived the cold war, and became great through competition. America has no need to fear rivalry but rather embrace it. History has taught us time and time again to never bet against Uncle Sam, so why doubt it now?

                More importantly though is this, our world today is filled with anarchy and fear. Without major powers to reign in global fanatics there can be no hope of sustained peace. A strong world order is a path to sustained peace. Without a world of order, we can only be left with a world of terror. 

Trouble with Tehran

Iranian nuclear programs have been a polarizing issue in the region for years.  Tensions between Tehran and Israel have continued to escalate overtime as the Iranian government has developed a nuclear program. Recently intelligence organizations have confirmed that suspected nuclear development sites are being moved to underground mountainside facilities. These underground facilities are both impervious to surveillance and any known bomb in the US Military arsenal.  Iran continues to maintain that no arms development is taking place and that nuclear power facilities are the objective.

                The recent militarization of these sites though seems to suggest otherwise. In light of this Israel has warned Iran, that any further development will be met with swift retribution by any means necessary. 

                Escalation in tensions between Israel and Iran could not have come at a worse time for the western world.  With their militaries committed in the countries of Afghanistan and withdrawing from Iraq, the west lacks both the power and the will to wage a serious war against Iran. Without western aid though, Israel cannot hope to defeat the Iranian military and protect her own borders. In this scenario Israel would be forced to utilize her nuclear arsenal.

                Aside from the political nightmare that would ensue following the first use of an atomic weapon since world war two, the aftereffects would be disastrous.  Analysts have confirmed that the detonation of a modern nuclear weapon in Tehran would cause major international damage.

                After the detonation of a nuclear weapon in Tehran, a cloud of radioactive debris and dust would be kicked up into the atmosphere. Once airborne the cloud would travel across borders affecting neighboring countries but, could travel as far as Pakistan and Russia.  Not only would this cloud put the lives of countless citizens at risk but, the cloud would affect American troops in Afghanistan.

                With this in mind it seems even harder to ignore Israel in the event of war.  The price of nuclear war in the region is just too high. Even so, it seems unlikely that the United States would support a conventional war after the Iraqi experience.

                For a decade now, American troops have fought to subdue Iraqi rebels and begin the process of nation building. The Iraq war has placed the States into financial peril, worsened international relations, and broken popular support for war.

                Iran is a nation that dwarfs Iraq in population and military capability. Population control alone would stretch the American Military to their limits. With the task of controlling roughly seventy million Iranians and defeating a trained military, support for military intervention is scarce.  Without American military support though, Israel is only left with the nuclear option.  No matter how you cut it, the West is in an unfortunate situation. We cannot risk the threat of nuclear war but without strong international support there can be no hope of a conventional victory.

                Should the world stand by and accept a nuclear Iran? Can we afford to leave the Israeli government in their time of need? More importantly, can we allow nuclear weapons to be used or do we have a duty to prevent that catastrophe no matter the cost?

Iranian Development

Nuclear development in Iran has always been a source of international turmoil. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the end of mutually ensured destruction, the United States and NATO publicly declared their opposition to further production of WMD’s worldwide.

                Further advances in technology have led to the nuclear option as a source of efficient clean energy. With such a guise readily available, enforcing a global nuclear embargo is becoming an impossible task.  Countries across the globe have taken this opportunity to develop nuclear programs with “energy” as their final goal. Particularly troubling is the development of Iran’s nuclear energy program.

                Iranian nuclear development has been a source of international turmoil and has evoked stern warnings from western backed Israel. Israel was born into the world with the threat of invasion by her regional neighbors. For the better part of the last fifty years Israel has managed to survive with an American supplied military (and an estimated 200 nuclear warheads). Now threatened by Iranian nuclear weapons Israel has warned Tehran that further development of their nuclear program will be met with swift retribution.  What are most frightening are Israel’s options for war.

                Iran maintains one of the largest militaries in the developed world and Israel cannot hope to win through conventional means. With the United States tied up in current conflicts the Israelis would be forced to use their nuclear arsenal. Western options are further limited; if the Israeli’s move against Iran, immediate American support may be the only option against nuclear war. After the Iraq war though, popular support for such a war seems unlikely.

                Without popular support for yet another eastern war, the western powers strive to keep Israeli action in check. At the same time though, an argument against military action is doubtful at best. American satellites have confirmed that suspected nuclear development facilities have been transported to special mountainside areas impervious to both conventional weaponry and satellite surveillance. The heightened security in the region can only mean weapons development and calls for intervention.

                When questioned the Iranian government maintains that these facilities are used for the development of benign nuclear energy.  If this is indeed true though, why then would Iranian facilities be moved to sites impervious to the deepest bunker buster bombs in use today? Why would UN officials be denied access to the areas in order to confirm energy development?

                The answer is all too obvious. The Iranian government has prepared their facilities for military intervention and despite international warnings will continue weapons development.  How long will Israel stand by before either a global war is ignited or nuclear fallout blankets the region?

Fourth Reich

In light of the 2011 revolutions Egypt has been called the region’s canary in the coal mine. Her readiness to overthrow the Mubarak regime and institute widespread political reform was echoed shortly thereafter in the actions of Libya and Syrian peoples. As the gunfire ceased Egypt again lead the way in political reform. Change had swept across the nation and people were ready for a new party, “The Muslim Brotherhood”.

In the West we could do little more than stand by as the political changes took place. We hoped for the Mubarak and Gadhafi regimes to be replaced with a pro Euro-American democracy, and with the first free elections in decades optimism was in the air.

In Egypt the results were unanimous, the people wanted the newly recognized “Muslim Brotherhood” to lead parliament and head the new government’s maiden voyage into the world stage.  Libya followed shortly thereafter with another series of Brotherhood dominated elections.

With elections over and the revolutions won Egypt has had a chance to test drive their new government on the world stage. Sadly though, the new driver doesn’t seem to be any better.

After barely half a year in office the Muslim Brotherhood (also known as the Freedom and Justice Party) has made some troubling moves. 

After becoming the majority party with almost 40% of Parliamentary seats, the Brotherhood set their sights on the presidential office. Their candidate, Mohamed Morsi not only won the election in a disputed race but has begun his career crossing swords with the Egyptian High Command and Judicial branch.  Morsi’s insistence to continue “unconstitutional” orders has not only created a division in the government but has raised questions about Brotherhood actions.

Reports have been made that, in light of the judicial and military stands the brotherhood has created a Muslim Brotherhood backed militia. Like the Waffen SS before them, the Brotherhood has resorted to fear and intimidation in order to subjugate the nation. As the party attempts to stronghold the Egyptian Army and take control of the Courts further bloodshed seems imminent.  

Are these recent actions a warning or possibly the future for Libya’s new government? Even with our forces committed elsewhere, the west cannot afford to play the pacifist, let alone allow the birth of a Fourth Reich.

The Brotherhood

Recently the Persian Gulf states and surrounding areas have experienced wide spread political turmoil and revolution.  Egypt deposed their former president, Libya plunged itself into a NATO backed civil war (not our finest hour but that is a debate for another time) , and Syria has begun their own violent uprising.  The old regimes have begun to fall out and with “the domino effect” in place; one has to wonder what the future holds.

                In the west we currently lack the popular support necessary for any real means of intervention and can do little more than hope for a pro Euro-American democracy to take hold in the new states.  Recent political evolutions in the region do little to firmly support this hope however, but lead down another path.

                The path I refer to is the newly popular political party of, “The Muslim Brotherhood”. The Muslim Brotherhood is a political organization created in the early twentieth century but legally rationalized and recognized in the major nation states of Egypt and Libya after the 2011 revolutions. In Egypt the party has taken the majority in the newly formed parliament and is poised for control over the new Libyan government. With military and popular support it seems unlikely that the party will have any significant rival in the region but continue down their current path of success.

                As a westerner it is in our nature to question the outcome of these recent elections and what this means for our corner of the world. I think however only time will be able to tell. All religious prejudice aside, the Muslim Brotherhood presents an interesting conundrum to the western world. The Brotherhood has recently advanced their political influence and after the 2011 revolutions controlling the Egyptian government and, poised for victory in both the Syrian conflict and Libyan elections. Furthermore with a growing influence in the Shia community the brotherhood continues to become an international player.

                Westerners are uneasy with this change in power however intervention seems both unlikely and unwise. After the Iraq war the Western world is actively opposed to any military intervention in the region especially for political purposes. Furthermore what difference could a western intervention make? The brotherhood holds a majority of the regions popular support and has grown via this new system of democratic elections not conquering despotism.  The brotherhood has also taken an incredibly political stance regarding their 21^st century views.  The organization advocates for democratic reform and a free press but, there still remains a call for Islamic reformation and religious profiling.

                Should The Brotherhood continue their road to political domination it is an unclear and foggy future for the western world.  Would a united Persian Gulf and Islamic region be able to co-exist with the westernization occurring across the region, and more importantly with West backed Israel? What does this new trend mean for the 21^st century and global relations? 

Egypt....Round two?

At the risk of sounding like a broken record I would like to bring up the subject of Egypt and the region at large. Recently that corner of the world has undergone a series of revolutions and political reformations for the better or for the worse. Some NATO (USA….) backed and some not, but the question everyone is asking is , “Will they get it right this time?”.  Not only does this question concern Israel and other regional powers but it scares the western world stiff.

                The western world is without question the unrivaled military power in the world, although nations such as China and Russia are again becoming world players, there is simply no comparison between their capabilities. Capabilities aside though the Western World lacks the man power and the will at present to prevent any further destruction of the Egyptian situation and from the looks of things that may be a very bad thing indeed.

                The newly elected Egyptian president, Mursi has decided that his first act of office would be a direct challenge to the legal rulings of the Supreme Court and new Egyptian constitution. In an effort to silence the President’s unlawful request the Egyptian military has enforced legal rule despite presidential orders. The Egyptian military’s precedent set before the president is an impressive one however dangerous.  Without the support of the major political party and a growing enemy in “The Muslim Brotherhood” how long can the military act in accordance with peaceful measures.

                The situation in Egypt is incredibly volatile and dangerous; the newly elected President has not only challenged a court order but has lost valuable credibility with the disobedience of the Egyptian military. Furthermore the Egyptian High command and judicial branches have deemed it necessary to increase the power of the Egyptian High command and have in effect started the path to martial law or civil war.  The western world does not have the ability to interfere with Egyptian political affairs at the present however should another power struggle occur what is there to stop yet another hostile state from forming in the region?

Please let us know what you think about the Egyptian crisis

Taxes or Business

                In modern politics  there is one debate which conservative and liberal views have fought over and will continue to fight over for the foreseeable future, Tax and business.  There are valid points to both sides of the argument, a country without taxes especially on one of the greatest sources of government income would have to compensate with heavier taxes on other sources however, a country with an incredibly high corporate tax would render the nation an enemy of potential business. Thus limiting potential domestic and economic growth.

                The United States is the undisputed king of global industry and comprising a quarter of the global GDP contains the largest names in business.  These businesses and huge industries are what allowed the States to become the manufacturing power house of the 40’s and then the pinnacle of capitalism during the cold war.  Recently though a new trend in the corporate tax rate has arisen and America now holds the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world.

                One has to wonder, firstly why would America elect to place such a strain on the corporate world when the economy and unemployment issues are fragile enough. The new weights congress has assigned to corporations in America have and will continue to force companies overseas. With the loss of these companies the unemployment crisis in America can only continue its trajectory and place a tighter grip on an already dwindling job market.  What we have to ask ourselves is this, “Do the ends justify the means?” If congress continues to place corporate taxes on these companies they could find offices and operate on foreign soil. In actuality this is the economically sensible thing to do, moving the majority of jobs overseas in order to reduce the amount of profit taxable by the American government makes sense. With huge tax rates and instant global communication there isn't any reason to stay. The question is, why would America elect to do so?

                Personally I hold little faith for  an increased corporate tax rate in the present state of the global economy. Such an economic powerhouse should elect to stimulate the economy through a lowered tax rate and promotion of business rather than injecting currency into circulation and increasing the corporate rate. The creation of jobs in the American economy should be the top priority at the moment. I fear further stress on corporate players will drive these companies to foreign soil and further the American crisis. 

For Health or for Votes??

While The United States has stood at the forefront of economic and technological progress for the past century she seems to be lagging behind in policies and services other nations would consider basic. Most pressing at the moment of course is the issue of Health Care. The United States stands alone among the first world nations in her administration of health care and the success of the privatized industry.  For decades now while most of Western Europe has adopted socialized medicine and a blanket care system for their citizens the United States has remained strongly rooted in the largely privatized system…that is until now of course.

                Four Years ago when the Obama administration stormed the white house and began their administration they preached a single word, “Change”.  The world and apparently the country for that matter had not been pleased with the Bush administration, an international war on terror, the invasion of IRAQ, and not to mention a massive deficit.  With all these weights slung across the Republican Party it was inevitable to predict the Democratic landslide in the Election and the eventual super-majority in congress. The country was ready for change, but that was four years ago…and this is now.

                 When we ask the average American Joe today “Has anything changed?”, by and large he’ll tell you the same thing…”not really”. That’s not to say nothing is different, under the Obama Administration there were significant cutbacks on the war in Iraq and Osama Bin Laden was finally killed. However I am partial to believe that this had more to do with a stagnant Iraq and the elite men of the US Navy SEALs than the powers of the Obama administration.  

                For the average American, life in the United States has not changed all too much over the past four years. Gas is still expensive, the BCS is still partial, and we hear more and more about the colossal national debt we have acquired over the past decade. Could it be that the sudden and incredibly public push for Obama care is nothing more than a political stunt? The possibility exists and is something I would like to entertain.

                The Obama administration is up for their second term of office and needs to evoke significant change to retain their votes. Is it just possible that the recent hype and controversy over “Obama-care” is nothing more than a political cruise missile aimed at the American Media?  In my opinion the strategy is an incredibly risky but rewarding gamble by the Administration to win the upcoming election. Should the bill finally pass into law and survive the gauntlet of political opposition it currently faces not only would the administration have exacted “Change” every American voter could understand but it will have created such volume that you would be hard pressed to not consider the upcoming election. Should it fail however, the Obama administration has handed the Republican Party a silver bullet (their capability to use it is another topic entirely), without Healthcare the Obama Administration enters the election season with bitter failure on the mind and momentum permanently lost.