The Dark Side of Western Foreign Policy
The Muslim 2024年2月10日
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3z3W4ijAvrQ
转写文稿
If you don't choose to take this deal, remember what happened to Muhammad mosad
in Iran, remember what happened to Salvador a yende in Chile; remember what
happened to arbans and Guatemala and ZM and Vietnam and lumba in the Congo. These are all presidents or prime ministers who refused to play the game and were taken out in coups or assassinations I'm going to expose a very Dark Side of Western foreign policy.
Now we'll see just what I mean by that in a second and I'm going to play a clip from the pbd podcast that exemplifies the horrific Dark Side of Western foreign policy. They don't only start wars bribe people it goes much deeper
than that and we'll see what their evil
master plan is what they've done in
places like South America in the Middle
East in their colonialization of these
different regions and countries and just
exactly what their plan is we're going
to see it from somebody firsthand who's
done these things on the ground it's not
just a mere conspiracy theory or
speaking about things without facts or
evidence we're going to show you someone
who admits to being part of this himself
but so there were all the you know there
were very strict anti-corruption laws in
the United States in those days and I
guess they still are but there's so many
ways to get around them and we we knew
all those ways to get around them so you
go in and you tell the president this
you say so buy into this loan and he
says but we're going to take on this
huge debt and it means we're going to
have to take money away from education
and social services and and health care
to to pay the interest on the debt we
say yes but you're GNA make a lot of
money you and your family so he knows
that he's doing something that's
probably not going to help his people
but it's gonna help him and then you
also say but if you don't choose to take
the RO the this uh if you don't choose
to take this deal remember what happened
to Muhammad mosad in Iran remember what
happened to Salvador aende in Chile
remember what happened to arbans and
Guatemala and ZM and Vietnam and lumba
in the Congo these are all presidents or
prime ministers who refused to play the
game and were taken out in coups or
assassinations and so basically we're
saying remember there's people we call
Jackal behind the scenes so basically
say hey Mr President in this hand I'm
offering you a lot of money for you and
your friends but in and if you choose
not to take it in this hand I got a gun
I didn't actually carry a gun but I knew
those guys were basically CIA assets
behind me that had guns and you know the
classic case the original case was was
Kermit Roosevelt who who over through
prime minister mosc in Iran and replaced
him with a sha and that was that set a
precedent and these presidents all know
this they know they know the history
they know they will be taken out if so
so what's the choice you know Patrick
what would you do this guy is John
Perkins he wrote a book which is called
the economic Hitman and he was an
economic Hitman for a long time for
several years for the US and his job was
to go to these foreign Nations to
basically bribe them to give them a deal
to say okay here's the way that we can
quote unquote improve your economy
and there would be deals offered to
these countries and to these foreign
leaders presidents Prime Ministers Kings
Etc and if they chose to not listen to
them or accept their deal what did he
say they would be killed and they would
be replaced by somebody else who's
willing to do their bidding Western
countries like the US and the UK and
France and all these different countries
they've done these things for a long
time and we're seeing a guy John Perkins
who was an economic Hitman man wrote an
entire book demonstrating and explaining
the details of what he used to do and
he's saying look I didn't carry a gun in
my hand but I would tell these people
and they knew exactly what would happen
if they refused to accept my deal but
anyway let's take a listen further as he
goes into a bit more detail let me ask
you when you are saying it how are you
saying it to me like I know the way you
just said it right now how would you say
it to me if I'm the shab Iran and you're
sitting with me and you're telling me
here's the options let me if you if you
could role play with me what would it be
like how would you say it yeah first of
all with the sh we didn't we didn't play
quite that game because he had plenty of
money he didn't have to take a loan we
were just trying to convince him that he
he ought to work with us rather than the
Soviet Union that he ought to you know
we wanted his oil and we were willing to
help him westernize his country and we
didn't want he didn't want to go to the
Soviet so that was a little bit
different we'll get that a minute give
me an example of somebody who you did
what I'm talk let's say I'm talking to
you you're you're you're you're the
president of colia okay and and we want
to get at your resources there and and
I'm saying to you I'm showing you all
these fancy reports that show how well
your country is going to do and you can
show these reports to your press and to
your people you can convince your people
that by taking on these loans you're
helping the country you're going to
build these big dams you're going to
build these big electrical systems
whatever so you got you got all the
material you need here and and it's it's
usually a series of meetings maybe some
of them over lunch with a few cocktails
Etc and the president's maybe electing a
little and then you you just sort of
suddenly start talking about you somehow
you bring up the topic of what happened
recently to Salvador in Chile or what
happened to arbans and guemal depending
on what part of the world you're in you
you talk about these people and you say
you know isn't that a shame and you talk
a little bit about this you know
depending on the president different
presidents you you approach differently
and but they get it I mean they know the
history it doesn't you know these guys
know what's going on and their advisers
know what's going on and they're usually
sitting there at the meetings too some
pretty smart advisers who probably you
know been to business school the same
business schools that I went to and so
forth and there everybody's you know I I
speak Spanish but half most of the
people in the room can speak English too
and they they F you know they got the
same background but I will say Patrick
and I mentioned I talk in the book about
two presidents who did not play the game
uh democratically elected president of
Ecuador haime Ros and the head of state
of Panama OM
maros they had tremendous Integrity they
saw what I was trying to do and they
didn't do it and they they understood
the dangers they were taking and they
talked about these things and both of
them were were I believe assassinated
they were they were both taken out and
two almost a little over two months
apart from each other in
1981 they were taken out in in their
private planes in Ecuador first with h
Ros his his private plane crashed very
suspicious circumstances in less than
three months later same thing happened
to Omar teros and can these were the
only two guys that stood up to this that
said we're not buying these deals and in
fact made a big Point uh public
relations they went out there and made
very strong statements and they set
examples for the world and they were
taken out in these plane crashes and
although there was never a Smoking Gun
found
because in a plane crash The Smoking Gun
Goes Up in Smoke um plane crashes
private plane crashes are the best way
to assassinate someone if you ever
decide you want to do
that and because of the evidence is gone
but in the case of of uh least one of
those cases H Ros the the plan's engines
were sent to a laboratory in in in in
Switzerland or Sweden Switzerland um and
They concluded that the plane had not
crashed it had blown up in the air and
so um and and there was tremendous other
evidence it's tremendous evidence that
that that points to these having been
assassinations so there you have it I
mean he goes into a lot more detail
really the interview and discussion is
fascinating but it exposes a really dark
side of Western foreign policy and
specifically the United States they
employ people like this guy John Perkins
who is an economic Hitman to go to these
foreign countries to sit down with them
and say look this is what we need you to
do you need to accept these loans we
will loan you money and you need to do
XYZ with it and we'll help you out with
XYZ supposedly and if you don't I'll
just remind you of this president that
mysteriously died in a plane crash and
it was such a shame you know basically
letting them know hey buddy if you don't
do this you're next this is what's going
to happen to you too and this isn't a
conspiracy theory this is a guy that
this was actually his job to do this for
several years you know people talk about
these things sometimes as sort of
conspiracy theories but it's a reality
when you see somebody who was actually
his job to do the bidding of the US in
this fashion that it becomes a serious
reality and now should we be so confused
as to why many Muslim nations and Muslim
rulers seem to be in cooperating at the
very least with the agendas of foreign
governments like the US and the UK and
these other places they're being
pressured maybe they're being threatened
I don't know all the details on what's
going on in each country but I'm saying
this has happened before and I'm sure
it's currently going on in many places
they just went over how it happened in
Iran and there are many other countries
where this has taken place not only
Muslim countries to be sure you talk
about a lot of countries in South
America where this is happened basically
a method of extortion right to get the
resources of these foreign countries get
their money basically have them on the
hook to make sure that they do whatever
the US tells them to and if they don't
they'll get rid of you in one way or
another and have you replaced by
somebody who is willing to do their
bidding might sound scary it might sound
conspiratorial but when you see somebody
like John Perkins actually speaking
about this you realize that it's not
conspiracy it's a sad reality and the
Muslims need to unite against this you
know we need to find a way to actually
unite against this but obviously the
first step is educating the public about
what actually is going on so I suggest
that people watch the full video and
look more into this John Perkins
economic Hitman on the pbd podcast not
that I want to promote this podcast but
this specific video if you're interested
in Reading I recommend reading his book
on the subject as well and I hope that
this video educates my audience and that
you guys look more into these subjects
and realize that this is not just a
conspiracy this is serious and we need
to come up with a action plan to combat
what's actually going on with that being
said guys I thank you all for watching
and your continued support but until
next time inshallah I'll see you all
again
then
The Dark Side of America's foreign policy
Rishi Suri - Editor - The Daily Milap - India Dec 12, 2023
https://www.globalorder.live/post/the-dark-side-of-america-s-foreign-policy
America's past efforts to destabilise democratic nations form a complex and contentious chapter in modern history, reflecting a mixture of geopolitical strategies, ideological battles, and economic interests. The origins of these efforts often lay in the Cold War context, where the United States, driven by the desire to contain the spread of communism, engaged in various covert and overt operations in different parts of the world.
Charting this through history, the period following World War II saw the emergence of the United States as a global superpower. This period was marked by the ideological struggle between capitalism, represented by the United States, and communism, led by the Soviet Union. The fear of a domino effect, where one nation falling to communism would lead to others following, significantly influenced U.S. foreign policy.
One of the most notable regions where the U.S. intervened was Latin America. Operations like the CIA-backed coup in Guatemala in 1954, which overthrew the democratically elected president Jacobo Árbenz, were justified on the grounds of preventing communist influence. Similarly, in Chile in 1973, the U.S. supported the military coup that ousted Salvador Allende, a democratically elected socialist president.
The Vietnam War is another example where the U.S. efforts went beyond just destabilising a democratic regime; it was a full-scale military intervention. The U.S. supported the South Vietnamese government against the communist North Vietnam, leading to a prolonged and devastating conflict.
In Iran, the 1953 coup against Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, orchestrated by the CIA and British intelligence, was aimed at maintaining Western control over Iranian oil resources. While Mossadegh was democratically elected, his nationalisation of the oil industry threatened Western economic interests.
Beyond ideological reasons, economic interests often played a significant role in these interventions. Ensuring friendly governments could mean easier access to natural resources, strategic locations for military bases, and markets for American goods.
These interventions have had long-lasting impacts on the countries involved. They often led to authoritarian regimes that suppressed political freedoms and human rights. The legacy of these actions continues to influence the perception of the United States in the international community.
In recent years, there has been a growing reflection and reassessment of these policies within the United States. The acknowledgment of past mistakes and the shift towards a more cooperative and respectful foreign policy can be seen as steps towards addressing the historical grievances. America's past efforts to destabilise democratic nations were shaped by a mix of ideological fears and economic interests. While these actions were rationalised as necessary for national security and global stability, they often resulted in negative consequences for the countries involved. Understanding and learning from this history is crucial for formulating more ethical and effective foreign policies in the future.
罗伯特·D·卡普兰(Robert D. Kaplan)凭借数十年担任《大西洋月刊》驻外记者和军事记者的第一手经验,概述了永恒的原则,这些原则应塑造美国在面临中国挑战的动荡世界中的角色。 从卡普兰对特朗普总统的直接想法,到对与朝鲜发生战争时会发生什么的坦率审视,这些文章是对美国未来几年将面临的艰难选择的有力思考。
The Return of Marco Polo's World: War, Strategy, and American Interests in the Twenty-first Century
By Robert D. Kaplan (Author) March 6 2018
https://www.amazon.ca/Return-Marco-Polos-World-Twenty-first/dp/0812996798
A bracing assessment of U.S. foreign policy and world disorder over the past two decades from the bestselling author of The Revenge of Geography and The Coming Anarchy
“[Kaplan] has emerged not only as an eloquent defender of foreign-policy realism but as a grand strategist to whom the Pentagon turns for a tour d’horizon.”—The Wall Street Journal
In the late thirteenth century, Marco Polo began a decades-long trek from Venice to China along the trade route between Europe and Asia known as the Silk Road—a foundation of Kublai Khan’s sprawling empire. Now, in the early twenty-first century, the Chinese regime has proposed a land-and-maritime Silk Road that duplicates exactly the route Marco Polo traveled.
Drawing on decades of firsthand experience as a foreign correspondent and military embed for The Atlantic, Robert D. Kaplan outlines the timeless principles that should shape America’s role in a turbulent world that encompasses the Chinese challenge. From Kaplan’s immediate thoughts on President Trump to a frank examination of what will happen in the event of war with North Korea, these essays are a vigorous reckoning with the difficult choices the United States will face in the years ahead.
Praise for The Return of Marco Polo’s World
“Elegant and humane . . . [a] prophecy from an observer with a depressingly accurate record of predictions.”—Bret Stephens, The New York Times Book Review
“These essays constitute a truly pathbreaking, brilliant synthesis and analysis of geographic, political, technological, and economic trends with far-reaching consequences. The Return of Marco Polo’s World is another work by Robert D. Kaplan that will be regarded as a classic.”—General David Petraeus (U.S. Army, Ret.)
“Thoughtful, unsettling, but not apocalyptic analyses of world affairs flow steadily off the presses, and this is a superior example. . . . Presented with enough verve and insight to tempt readers to set it aside to reread in a few years.”—Kirkus Review (starred review)
“An astute, powerfully stated, and bracing presentation.”—Booklist
“This volume compiles sixteen major essays on America’s foreign policy from national security commentator Kaplan. . . . An overview of thoughtful, multilayered positions and perspectives evolving through changing circumstances.”—Publishers Weekly
THE RETURN OF MARCO POLO'S WORLD
War, Strategy, and American Interests in the Twenty-First Century
By Robert D. Kaplan
280 pp. Random House. $28.
The 1990s: Remember them? The decade began with the collapse of the Soviet Union. It ended with the Dow bursting past the 10,000 mark. In between, we got victory in the gulf, the creation of the European Union and the World Trade Organization, NATO enlargement, an American budget surplus, peace in Northern Ireland, Google, victory in the Balkans and (Charles Barkley aside) a world firmly united in wanting to be “like Mike.”
Good times.
Or so they seemed. In 1994, Robert D. Kaplan, a foreign correspondent who had cut his teeth covering the Balkans, the Iran-Iraq war and the famine in Ethiopia, wrote an influential essay in The Atlantic warning of “The Coming Anarchy.” If, as Francis Fukuyama thought, we had entered a “posthistorical” era of bourgeois comfort and democratic legitimacy, it was an era whose bounties relatively few shared. The rest, Kaplan wrote, “will be stuck in history, living in shantytowns where attempts to rise above poverty, cultural dysfunction and ethnic strife will be doomed by a lack of water to drink, soil to till and space to survive in.”
History has not vindicated every aspect of Kaplan’s thesis — Pakistan and India, for instance, haven’t fallen apart, despite the essay’s suggestion that they might, and most measures of human welfare continue to show progress. But his general pessimism about the world that lay in wait in the 21st century now looks remarkably prescient, at least next to the Pollyannaish forecasts of techno-optimists, democracy promoters and globalization enthusiasts.
That’s reason to welcome “The Return of Marco Polo’s World,” an eclectic collection of elegant and humane essays, all but one of which previously appeared in The Atlantic and other publications over the past dozen or so years. Kaplan’s interests run wide: the ethnic tangles of Central Asia; the political thought of Samuel Huntington; the unsung heroism of Medal of Honor winners; the prospect of war on the Korean Peninsula. Above all there is his fascination with the decisive impact of geography on the calculations, ambitions and illusions of statesmen and societies.
Take the Mediterranean. For half a millennium, it mostly separated not only two continents but also two civilizations: Christendom and Islam. Yet the collapse of political order throughout much of the Maghreb has reminded millions of Africans that the Middle Sea isn’t so wide after all. Thousands have drowned trying to cross it; many more have succeeded, with cumulative effects on what we used to think of as European society.
“We are back to a much older cartography that recalls the High Middle Ages, in which ‘the East’ did not begin in any one particular place because regions overlapped and were more vaguely defined,” Kaplan writes. “The dichotomy of the Orient and the Occident is breaking down the world over, even as subtle gradations continue to persist.”
What’s true in the Mediterranean basin is true in other places, too — and in other ways. Russia’s 2014 invasion of Ukraine (and the West’s de facto acquiescence in it) is the most visible evidence of the flimsiness of the post-Cold War’s national borders.
But what about covert Russian influence peddling in places like Bulgaria; or overt influence peddling through the Russia Today “news” channel; or cyberoperations, via Twitter and Facebook, to disrupt and undermine Western elections?
After the Cold War, many of us naïvely assumed that the communications revolution would be the vehicle through which the West would spread its values, attitudes and tastes to the rest of the world. We forgot that the revolution worked in the opposite direction as well: that for every Google executive fighting for political liberalization in Cairo, there might also be an alienated young Islamist in the West learning how to build a bomb by reading Inspire, Al Qaeda’s slick online magazine.
Kaplan never loses sight of this fluidity: “The smaller the world actually becomes because of the advance of technology,” he writes, “the more permeable, complicated and overwhelming it seems, with its numberless, seemingly intractable crises that are all entwined.”
That is the world’s reality — crooked, unexpected, ironic and often tragic — and it leads Kaplan to his capital-R Realist foreign-policy inclinations. It’s a subject he explores in chapter-length profiles of Henry Kissinger, Huntington and the University of Chicago’s John J. Mearsheimer (whose 2001 magnum opus, “The Tragedy of Great Power Politics,” was later overshadowed by his tendentious and bigoted screed, “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy,” written with Stephen M. Walt).
Kaplan makes clear that, at its best, Realism provides American statesmen with a middle path between what Kissinger once called “the disastrous oscillations between overcommitment and isolation.” This is what guided the Nixon administration as it sought to get out of Vietnam in a way that preserved America’s reputation as a reliable ally, while also securing a balance of power (through the opening with China) that would help see the United States through the Cold War.
That Kissinger was willing to do this in ways that scandalized moralistic American liberals is more than fine by Kaplan. “Ensuring a nation’s survival sometimes leaves tragically little room for private morality,” he argues. “The rare individuals who have recognized the necessity of violating such morality, acted accordingly and taken responsibility for their actions are among the most necessary leaders for their countries, even as they have caused great unease among generations of well-meaning intellectuals who, free of the burden of real-world bureaucratic responsibility, make choices in the abstract and treat morality as an inflexible absolute.”
There is much truth in that observation: Foreign policy is not merely a subset of ethics. Yet Realism also has limits that its practitioners can fail to appreciate. If it offers a powerful caution against overdosing on the kind of idealism that led us into nation-building exercises in Vietnam and Iraq, it can also keep statesmen from grasping their opportunities. Many Realists were scandalized by Ronald Reagan’s belief that the Cold War could be won. He proved to be right, in part because he understood the moral dimensions of the struggle against Communism better than they did; and in part, too, because sometimes there really is a good case for optimism.
Realists can also fail to grasp the power of ideology to shape the behavior of states, often in ways that deform or disregard their own interests. Iran, for instance, has no rational reason to threaten Israel, with which it shares ancient cultural bonds and current enemies. Yet Tehran threatens Israel as a matter of theological conviction, Realpolitik be damned. It is the very rationalism of much of what goes by the name Realism that undermines its claims to understand the world as it really is.
Kaplan gets this: “A student of Shakespeare,” he writes, “would have grasped Vladimir Putin’s character long before an international relations wonk.” Geography may be the immutable fact of geopolitics, but geopolitics is still politics, and thus a human story.
This makes one of Kaplan’s final chapters, on the dangers of a new utopianism, all the more chilling. We may think we’ve put Orwell’s “Big Brother” behind us, but the psychological conditions that gave rise to fascism and Communism are very much with us today. “The very idea that some sermon or blog or tweet has gone viral is a sad reflection on the state of individualism in the 21st century,” he says. “The electronic swarm is a negation of loneliness that prepares the way for the new ideologies of totalitarianism.”
It’s a dark prophecy from an observer with a depressingly accurate record of predictions. When it comes to curbing our enthusiasms, Kaplan’s achievement is to throw so much shade with so much verve.