After killing hundreds of thousands of Muslims in the name of democracy, the White House has now decided that ‘stability in the region’ is by far, much more important.
On Saturday, The Wall Street journal reported that the Obama administration is devising a new Middle East strategy in the face of ongoing Arab world turmoil, preferring stability over democracy for key allies in the region.
Here in Britain not many people believed Bush and Blair when they preached democracy and moral interventionism—and I guess that the new American strategy cannot be taken at all seriously either.
Actually, I believe that by now, the American ruling elite should just come clean and tell the truth to the Arabs in the region: ‘Listen you guys—all we want is your oil. We don’t care what you do with your life, or what you believe in; just keep the flow of this dark greasy lubricant stable.’
I wonder why is it so difficult for the American and British governments to produce such a simple statement? After all, is not telling the truth a Western value?
The report contended that the new American policy is due to domestic U.S. criticism that the Obama administration had sent mixed messages in the initial stages of the Egyptian uprising, and that the ambiguity and confusion had led to the ousting of President Mubarak, a longtime Western ally. The White House had tentatively endorsed Mubarak’s leadership at the beginning of the protests—and then switched allegiances, throwing full support behind the protesters, who eventually overthrew the three-decade Egyptian president.
I do not entirely agree that Obama had behaved in a confusing or inconsistent manner. I think that the White House policy is, actually, very coherent and very consistent, for it constantly bounces and swings between backing the people, and then the tyrants. When the Americans are convinced that the success of the revolution is imminent, they support the people. But when they are certain that oppression and tyranny will continue to ‘provide the goods’ (cheap oil), then they simply go ahead and support their traditional undemocratic allies.
Surely it is about time to state the obvious: It is not morality; it is not values, and neither is it any ethical consideration that drives our leaders.
Rather, it is sheer pragmatism, and relentless greed.
Gilad Atzmon is an Israeli jazzmusician, author and political activist.
RSS
America’s bloody pragmatism
Posted on March 7, 2011 by Gilad Atzmon
After killing hundreds of thousands of Muslims in the name of democracy, the White House has now decided that ‘stability in the region’ is by far, much more important.
On Saturday, The Wall Street journal reported that the Obama administration is devising a new Middle East strategy in the face of ongoing Arab world turmoil, preferring stability over democracy for key allies in the region.
Here in Britain not many people believed Bush and Blair when they preached democracy and moral interventionism—and I guess that the new American strategy cannot be taken at all seriously either.
Actually, I believe that by now, the American ruling elite should just come clean and tell the truth to the Arabs in the region: ‘Listen you guys—all we want is your oil. We don’t care what you do with your life, or what you believe in; just keep the flow of this dark greasy lubricant stable.’
I wonder why is it so difficult for the American and British governments to produce such a simple statement? After all, is not telling the truth a Western value?
The report contended that the new American policy is due to domestic U.S. criticism that the Obama administration had sent mixed messages in the initial stages of the Egyptian uprising, and that the ambiguity and confusion had led to the ousting of President Mubarak, a longtime Western ally. The White House had tentatively endorsed Mubarak’s leadership at the beginning of the protests—and then switched allegiances, throwing full support behind the protesters, who eventually overthrew the three-decade Egyptian president.
I do not entirely agree that Obama had behaved in a confusing or inconsistent manner. I think that the White House policy is, actually, very coherent and very consistent, for it constantly bounces and swings between backing the people, and then the tyrants. When the Americans are convinced that the success of the revolution is imminent, they support the people. But when they are certain that oppression and tyranny will continue to ‘provide the goods’ (cheap oil), then they simply go ahead and support their traditional undemocratic allies.
Surely it is about time to state the obvious: It is not morality; it is not values, and neither is it any ethical consideration that drives our leaders.
Rather, it is sheer pragmatism, and relentless greed.
Gilad Atzmon is an Israeli jazz musician, author and political activist.