The Three Musketeers
In
the final analysis, the new UN Security Council resolution passed on
Thursday calling for an end to nuclear proliferation did not name Iran
- despite robust canvassing by the US and Britain - and that was
because Russia and China wouldn't allow that to happen. Also, the
resolution stopped well short of authorizing forced inspections of
countries believed to be developing weapons. M K Bhadrakumar - Asia Times
(Brazilian
VP) Jose Alencar, who also served as defense minister from 2004 to
2006, said in an interview with journalists from several Brazilian news
media that his country does not have a program to develop nuclear
weapons, but should: "We have to advance on that." "The nuclear
weapon, used as an instrument of deterrence, is of great importance for
a country that has 15,000 kilometers of border to the west and a
territorial sea" where oil reserves have been found, Alencar said. Associated Press
Venezuela's
science and technology minister said his country is working with Russia
to detect deposits of uranium but withdrew an earlier denial that the
country was also working with Iran. Associated Press
Let me cut directly to the chase, right to the bottom line:
In the "third world" -- which is a nice way of saying "former European
(read "white") colonies", -- Britain, France and the USA have always
been considered the great imperialist powers. And during the Cold War
Soviet Russia and Communist China were considered the
"anti-imperialist" powers.
With the collapse of "really existing socialism" and the advent of
globalization it is interesting to note that this description remains
valid.
During the Cold War this anti imperialist reputation gained much
influence for China and Russia and many leaders and intellectuals of
third world or "non-aligned" countries, with no desire to import the
Soviet or Mao Tse Tung's version of socialism into their countries,
found both countries useful counterweights to the USA, Britain and
France in their struggle to maintain some semblance of their national
sovereignty.
What was least attractive about Communism (especially in the Soviet
case) for the former "western" colonies, bent on defending their newly
won sovereignty, was the idea that "
really existing socialism" was a "
global" movement,
international, and which subordinated its allies, like colonies, to "The Motherland of Socialism", with its capital in Moscow.
These former "western" colonies, with their history of exploitation and
subordination, tend to be equally suspicious of a global movement,
which we could call "Really Existing Globalization", that subordinates
its allies, like colonies, to "The Motherland of Capitalism"... with
its capital in Washington.
The end of the Cold War brought China and Russia into the world
economic system... which means they can play both games simultaneously:
they can buy and sell advanced weapon systems, cars, electronics and
assorted bric-a-brac all over the world and at the same time refresh
their Cold War street cred as defenders of the national sovereignty of
the west's (read white people's) former colonies, where most of the
world's natural resources are, (that's why they were colonies in the
first place).
America's invasion of Iraq, while it simultaneously pussyfoots around
the much more tyrannical and grotesque, but atomic bomb armed, North
Korea, has made it clear to everyone that the only reliable guarantor
of national sovereignty is the atomic bomb.
The atom bomb means the end of
gunboat diplomacy.
Naturally, many citizens of the third world see that the "west's"
urgency in keeping Iran from having an atomic weapon, like Israel's,
Pakistan's and India's, is simply in order to dominate Iran more
comfortably. The United States, Britain and France, from this point of
view, have a lot to lose if more countries get the atomic bomb, it
would mean the end of globalization as a western controlled power
system, as it would no longer be possible for the "western" powers to
continue to bend the former colonies to their will. using military
force... or at least many of these countries might have reason to
believe or to hope so.
So finally, just by dragging their feet on sanctioning Iran and
continuing to sell that country weapons and to buy their oil, Russia
and China are building up much good will and influence in the countries
who produce the commodities that the developed world transforms.
I can imagine some readers saying, "Oh it's all different now, because
Barack Obama's father came from Kenya and he's black". To those readers
I would say that the president of the United States is the president of
the United States, no matter if he is black, white, yellow or green. If
anyone in the third world ever thought that President Obama would not
behave as his office and the economy of his country, or the interests
of those who paid for his campaign oblige him to, they will soon learn
differently.
