& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Beginning of the end of American hegemony

Anisur Rahman
EVER since the end of World War II (WWII), the United States of
America had enjoyed the status
of a superpower of the world. No country overtly dared to challenge American hegemony. The other major victorious power of the WWII -- the erstwhile USSR -- did lodge a muted challenge and the so called "Cold War" ensued. But American militarily surrounded the whole of the Soviet bloc and contained the spread of socialism. American industrial base and its economy were by far the strongest in the world and the USSR was no match at all. This state of affairs continued until an apocalyptic event of historic proportions took place in 2001.
On the morning of September 11, 2001, an earth-shattering (excuse the pun) event took place in America. The twin towers of the World Trade Centre in Lower Manhattan, New York, the potent symbol of American capitalism, were ignominiously destroyed by the al-Qaeda by crashing American civilian air-
crafts onto them. It shook the whole of America to the core; the invincibility of the world's only superpower had been shattered brutally. The country was at the receiving end of an attack on its own soil. Even President George W. Bush, the most powerful man in the world, had to be protected in American itself from the threat of a terrorist attack on that day. The ignominy of the superpower was beyond belief and America is still reeling from that event.
The hunt for the terrorists who per-
petrated such a heinous crime was immediate. The al-Qaeda was on American radar for quite sometime and when it was found that this organisation was indeed behind this audacious attack, the fury was boundless. America vowed to destroy al-Qaeda completely. Bush asked the world to join him in his crusade and said: "Either you are with us or against us." America launched an attack on Afghanistan -- the bastion of the Taliban supporting al-Qaeda. Almost simultaneously, America targeted Iraq on the pretext that it supported and harboured Islamic terrorism.
Bush stated in his State of the Union Address in January 2002 that Iraq, Iran and North Korea were an "axis of evil." America claimed that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction (WMD) which must be destroyed, and that necessitated removal of Saddam Hussein. This hard-headed policy without any international consensus not only alienated America in the eyes of the world but also fractured Nato badly. France and Germany were strongly opposed to the Iraq adventure.
Disregarding the division in the Western power bloc and ignoring international efforts for rational approach in tackling terrorism, America almost unilaterally led the attack on Iraq and Afghanistan. Lack of evidence that these two countries were behind the 9/11 attack did not deter America in her pursuit for revenge. It was a sheer gung-ho response. The country adopted the doctrine of "pre-emptive" strike on suspected countries. If necessary, America would carry out military action unilaterally without international consent or even UN approval. This was a brutal proclamation of military might and it did not endear America at all to the rest of the world.
War is never a low cost undertaking. It is estimated that the total cost of American "War on Terror" from 2001 to 2011, with inflation adjusted figure, amounts to over $2,000 billion, almost twice the amount for the whole of the Vietnam War.
But could America financially afford to wage two wars simultaneously? Even before these two wars of choice, American economy was not in great shape. Productivity was dropping, and American share of
the world economy was in decline. Russia was putting its house together after the collapse of its empire in 1989. Slowly and imperceptibly China, India and Brazil were emerging as the world's economic powerhouses. The Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) was amassing a huge credit balance. All of these things were happening while America was blinded with rage and revenge and pursuing aggressive military adventures against her presumed enemies.
Ten years on, following 2001, America finds itself in dire economic straits. Booming Chinese exports, were voraciously absorbed by the Americans. China offered credits, from her export earnings, to Americans to buy Chinese goods. To Americans It was like pay-day throughout the month. China, India and the OPEC countries also bought limitless amount of American sovereign bonds, which allowed America to pursue military adventures abroad without too much financial worry. But obviously things cannot go on like this forever and the consequence of such profligate behaviour will have to surface sometime.
The annual budget deficit in America in 2011 is now nearly $1,600 billion ($1.6 trillion), the sovereign debt has ballooned to $14.3 trillion. In other words,
every American man, woman and child bears a national debt of $55,000, which is one of the highest in the world, if not the highest. No wonder
American credit rating agency, Standard and Poor's (S&P), recendy downgraded American credit rating from AAA to AA+. This is the first time in American history that the country has lost its triple A rating. Moreover, S&P has put America on the negative watch, which means that if the country fails to come to grips with its national debt, the AA+ rating may be further downgraded.
How did it all come about? How could the world's only superpower with the largest economy and huge industrial base run up such a massive, almost mind boggling national deficit? The answer to this can be found in profligate national expenditure and unilateral American military undertakings abroad, arising from excessive ego of national power.
During the Cold War, America pursued a policy of collective defence — Nato, Seato, Cento and so on to counter the might of the erstwhile USSR. The advan-
tage of collective defence was that all participating countries shared the cost and pain of defence and war. But after the demise of socialism and disbanding of the USSR and consequent disappearance of Russian threat, America saw no further need for collective defence.
When France and Germany opposed the attack on Iraq, America proclaimed that in the absence of collective agreement within Nato, the "mission will determine the participating countries."
At heart, it was the stance of the superpower to pursue a military undertaking on its own if necessary, particularly when the issue was nothing short of punishing the country or countries for the audacious attack on America and challenging its global might.
Historically, socialism hegemony did not collapse from foreign aggression. It happened from within when the state could no longer prop it up financially, when it failed to support client states internationally and maintain the military might of the superpower. It is the economic collapse which led to political collapse. Is a similar thing happening to America -- economic collapse leading to the demise of capitalism?
Although it is highly unlikely that capitalism will disappear overnight the American brand of capitalism, i.e. raw capitalism with no compassion for the poor, the unfortunate and down trodden members of the society, is going to be damaged. If 1989 is regarded as the historic time when socialism collapsed, then in the same vein one can say that 2001 may come to be seen as the beginning of the end of American hegemony.
The writer is MSRP FNucI, Manchester, UK.
E-mail: anisur.rahmanl@btinternet.com
****Although it is highly unlikely that capitalism will disappear overnight the US brand of capitalism, i.e. raw capitalism with no compassion for the poor is going to be damaged. If1989 is regarded as the time when socialism collapsed, then one can say that 2001 may be seen as the beginning of the end of American hegemony.*****