Saturday, July 07, 2007

The tragic collapse of America's standing in the world

Glenn Greenwald printed a superb article yesterday on the collapse of America's standing throughout the globe over the past six years based on recent polling from a worldwide Pew poll. It really undercuts the specious argument that anyone who disagrees with the disgraceful direction which Bush II has taken that great nation must in some way be fundamentally anti-American or jealous.

There are many of us in Europe who are well aware of the debt which we owe to our American friends. But that debt has never meant that we were blind to America's failings, it simply meant that we were also aware that America's virtues far outweighed those failings.

Under Bush that has ceased to be the case.

The picture that emerges here is conclusively clear. In virtually every area of the world -- Western Europe, Eastern Europe, Latin America and Asia -- overwhelming majorities of people viewed the U.S. favorably prior to the Bush presidency. But in virtually every single country in each of those regions, the percentage which now views the U.S. favorably has collapsed, and is now confined only to minorities, often tiny minorities.

The precipitous drop in U.S. credibility -- from levels of great respect to levels of widespread contempt -- is as stark among America's traditional allies as it is in less friendly regions. Contrary to claims found among both America's right and some on Europe's left, the U.S. enjoyed great moral credibility among its Western European allies prior to the Bush presidency.
The arguments that people dislike America because they are jealous or because they are intrinsically anti-American ought to be dismissed out of hand as the intellectual cop-outs that they are. For both arguments seek to put America's responsibility for it's own behaviour as somehow beyond reasonable discourse, something to be debated only by zealots, madmen and virulent anti-Americans.

The natural assumption behind both positions is that America is intrinsically good and it, therefore, naturally follows that any action she takes is also good. This logic dictates that anyone arguing against any American action must have dark and sinister reasons for doing so.

This leaves aside the fact that it is actually because American ideals ARE so good which accounts for the huge disappointment around the globe when American herself fails to live up to them or appears, as she does under the Bush administration, to have abandoned them altogether.

Indeed, this argument is merely an extension of the theory posited by Israel's supporters that anyone who objects to Israel's rampant colonialism in the occupied territories is somehow actually engaging in a subtle form of anti-Semitism. In both cases the objections are an attempt to end argument rather than challenge the validity of the initial charge.

Indeed, Greenwald - and this makes him unique amongst most American commentators - actually has the courage to put the Israeli part of the equation on to the table, something that, in my opinion, is frequently missing from American discourse.
Finally, it is worth noting one fact that is indisputable yet frequently denied in American political discourse, except when it is ignored altogether -- namely, that America's blind support for Israel in its disputes with its neighbors plays a key role -- not the only role, but a key role -- in why America's moral standing has collapsed: Note that even a plurality of Israelis believe that our Middle East policies have excessively favored Israel.
The main point of course is, and this is highlighted in the Pew poll, that if it were true that the world was basically anti-American - or simply jealous of America's economic strength - then there is very little that Bush could have done in the last few years to cause such a catastrophic collapse in the world's opinion of the US, as it would naturally follow that the world simply hated the US anyway.

The fact that Bush's presidency has resulted in such a collapse of support for the US as a world leader shows that the world cares about the US's policies as these policies effect the lives of millions of people. I can well understand why it matters not a jot to many Americans that Bush invaded Iraq without a second UN resolution. I am sure there were many Brits who took a similar attitude to the actions of Britain at the height of her Empire. However, for those of us who don't live within the borders of the world's most powerful nation the rules and regulations formed in the aftermath of WWII matter.

When Bush announced his policy of pre-emption he was effectively dispensing with a key tenet of international law. Those of us who rely on international law for security - rather than the largest standing army in the world - were, naturally, made extremely uneasy by this.

If the most powerful nation in the world decides it will no longer be bound by the rules that it helped to create, then we are left with a world ruled by force rather than by the rule of law. It is this aspect of Bush's leadership that most of us have found disquieting.

Greenwald sums it up best:

The role that the U.S. has played in the world for decades is critically important. The ideals and political principles which this country for decades has symbolized have been -- even when we have deviated from those principles -- a critical anchor for our security and standing in the world as well as a vital source of inspiration for people on every continent. As the world's sole superpower, the face that we choose to show to the world, the principles which guide our actions, are incomparably important.

When we adhere to those values and exemplify those principles, people around the world see that and judge our country accordingly. When we repudiate those values and violate those principles, our moral standing and credibility collapse. There is a direct causal link between how we conduct ourselves and how we are perceived in the world.

Amen to that, I say.

Click title to read full article. Highly recommended that you do so.

No comments: