About Me

My photo
I have a burning need to know stuff and I love asking awkward questions.

Thursday, August 09, 2007

Russia’s Gorbachev Says US is Sowing World Disorder

by Guy Faulconbridge for Reuters

Friday, July 27, 2007

Former Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev criticized the United States, and current President George W. Bush in particular, on Friday for sowing disorder across the world by seeking to build an empire. Gorbachev, who presided over the break-up of the Soviet Union, said Washington had sought to build an empire after the Cold War ended but had failed to understand the changing world.

“The Americans then gave birth to the idea of a new empire, world leadership by a single power, and what followed?” Gorbachev asked reporters at a news conference in Moscow. “What has followed are unilateral actions, what has followed are wars, what has followed is ignoring the U.N. Security Council, ignoring international law and ignoring the will of the people, even the American people.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Bush say they are friends but ties have been strained by U.S. plans for a missile defense shield in Europe, disagreements over Kosovo and the war in Iraq, and competition for allies in the former Soviet Union. Many Russians view the United States as a rival and enemy. Gorbachev, 76, who left politics after the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union, is deeply unpopular in Russia. Though feted abroad, he is blamed in Russia for sinking the Soviet empire and plunging millions into poverty.

“When I look at today’s world I have a worrying feeling about the growth of world disorder,” he said. “I don’t think the current president of the United States and his administration will be able to change the situation as it is developing now — it is very dangerous,” he said. Gorbachev said Russia’s hopes of building stronger ties with Washington had waned in the face of a series of U.S. administrations interested in building an empire. “It is a massive strategic mistake: no single centre can command the entire world, no one,” he said. “Current America has made so many mistakes.”

He said the U.S. administration was apparently unable to adapt to a swiftly changing world and had ignored — or was unable to see — the rise of Brazil, Russia, India and China as economic heavyweights. Treaties limiting the number of nuclear weapons should be observed, he said, adding that officials in Washington should be wary of sparking a new arms race. Gorbachev, who became Soviet leader in 1985, battled against the conservative wing of the Communist Party to push through reforms that dismantled the one-party system, freed the press and ended restrictions on religion.

The father of “glasnost” (openness) said he supported Putin’s policies but that the pro-Kremlin United Russia party had eroded democratic rights. He said Putin’s “seriousness” as a leader would be assured if he left office according to the constitution. Putin says he will leave office in 2008 after two terms in office.

[The on-going action of the US (and its rather unfortunate Allies) is certainly destabilising the Middle East, but the question that occupies my mind is this: – Is the destabilisation of the region deliberate or accidental? Or to put it another way – Is the present US Administration stupid or stupid?]

5 comments:

Scott said...

The current administration? Well you have to go back a bit further than this administration if empire is the complaint.

CyberKitten said...

Well, I'm not sure about other Administrations... but this one seems particularly inept in its Foreign Policy - though it's never really been America's strong point.

dbackdad said...

The scary thing is that I do believe the destablization is deliberate with this administration. While the U.S. has certainly meddled there for a long time, it is a specific policy choice by the neo-conservative movement to foment a regional war and to increase our imperialistic presence. Criticizing previous administrations does nothing. There are not in office. They cannot be influenced. If it was a Democratic administration fucking up the Middle East, I would say the same thing.

CyberKitten said...

I agree with you dbackdad. I too belive that the destablization of the region is a deliberate policy - which is even more stupid than doing it accidentally. At least if it was an unintended consequence of bad policy you could kind of forgive them....

I guess it's like car-crash TV except with whole countries. We can only watch our TV's and look on in horror and dismay.

Scott said...

Criticizing previous administrations does nothing. There are not in office. They cannot be influenced. If it was a Democratic administration fucking up the Middle East, I would say the same thing.

It's not about influencing past administrations brother, it's about influencing future voters. The current front runners in the campaign for presidency all endorse either continuing our current foreign policy or reverting to the foreign policy pre-9/11. (AKA, the foreign policy that CAUSED 9/11)

The fact that they are front runners means people generally accept these views, which is to say they accept imperialism as we've been an imperial power since McKinley really. So as I originally stated, if EMPIRE is the complaint, than you need to go back further. If the war in Iraq is the complaint, than you don't. But don't be surprised when it happens again. And again. And again.

Article 1

Article 2