A funny thing happened to Richard Haass. He wrote an article
and saw it printed in the American Interest, and after adaptation saw it
reprinted in the Wall Street Journal. The American Interest took up the article
on April 20, 2014, gave it the title: “U.S. Foreign Policy: In troubling
Disarray” and the subtitle: “The Obama Administration must prove to America 's
allies that it is competent to lead.” Ten days later, the Wall Street Journal
took up the article and gave it the title: “A Foreign Policy Flirting With
Chaos” and the subtitle: “The most egregious case of fecklessness has been on Syria .
Doubts about American dependability were raised far and wide.”
When two publications of that caliber take up and print a
non-syndicated article, you can be certain the article represents a sizable
swath of the American chattering elite. But as demonstrated by the titles and
the subtitles chosen for it, the message is that America finds itself out of step
with the world. Is this true? Or is it a perception shared by an American group
that is itself out of step with the American public and the world? To explore
these propositions, we need to go to the most fundamental of fundamentals – the
concept of time.
We are all transients because we come, we live our lives and
we depart. This is true for us as individuals; it is true for the culture and,
in a broader sense, true for the species. What this means from the practical
standpoint is that every moment of our existence is one of transition. If a
change occurs between one moment and the next, we detect tangible proof of the
transition and call it progress or chaos depending on our disposition. If no
change occurs, we call it stability or stagnation ... again depending on our
disposition.
From the moment that our species began to think till the
advent of the theory of Relativity, it was believed that time was unchanging.
Relativity proved otherwise, and the phenomenon of elastic time is now used in
practical, technological applications. This being science, it is not to be
confused with the psychological phenomenon of feeling that time is moving fast
when we are happy, and moving slowly when we are sad or bored. We go through
these moments as individuals when getting on with our lives, and we go through
them as a collective – be that a family, a tribe, a nation or a species.
Each of us as individual has a level of tolerance for
enduring boredom or sad times. This also applies to cultures in which most
individuals appear to be on the go all the time, or appear comfortable living a
lethargic sort of existence. And this is where the notion of length of time
becomes crucial for, even someone that is always on the go will tolerate a
minute or two of lethargy. By the same token, someone that enjoys living a
lethargic existence will want to see a little change once in a while.
As long as the individuals or the collectives only mind
their own business and no more, little or nothing happens. But when areas of
interest begin to overlap, and they encroach on each other's turfs, what is
progress to one may become chaos to the other, and what is stability to one may
become stagnation to the other. A tug of war usually erupts between the
factions at which time one of several possibilities may result. These vary from
the factions learning from one another to them competing peacefully against
each other to them fighting for turf and influence – each seeking to impose its
preferences on the other.
To get back to the Richard Haass article, we see the
description of all those forces at work in a turbulent world, and we get the
sense that the American administration is confused about what to do with it. So
we wonder if this is the case in reality, or it is that Haass finds it
difficult to separate what he sees happening on the world stage from what he
judges to be the administration's response to the unfolding events.
Look how he starts the presentation: “American foreign
policy is in disarray. The result is unwelcome news for the world, which
depends upon the United
States to promote order in the absence of
any other country.” Well, there are enough inaccuracies here to flabbergast 95
percent of humanity which considers the UN, not America to be the body that
promotes order in the world – and only when it is summoned to do so.
But then look what Haass says a few paragraphs later:
“history shows that ousting leaders can be difficult and … extremely hard to
bring about alternative authority that is better for American preferences.” Is
he saying the world depends on the United States to oust leaders and
bring about alternatives that suit American preferences? Phew! What a self
serving revolting pretense! Who do these people think they are?
And now, look how he ends his presentation: “We are
witnessing a movement where governments [have] reduced regard for U.S.
preferences. Such a world promises to be messier, and less supportive of
American interests.” Notice the rewrite of the last sentence to appear in the
WSJ as: “Such a world promises to be even messier, and less palatable for U.S. interests,
than it is today.” Written either way, it means that America is not doing the world a
favor; it is doing it for itself … or is it? After all, there remains the big
question: Who is America 's
self?
Mindful of the total paralysis which plagues the country
when it comes to serving the interests of the general population, and comparing
that with the frantic energy which is devoted by all the parties to serve the
interests of Israel and the
Jews, you conclude that America
does not belong to Americans; it belongs to the Jews and to Israel . When America
speaks, the world hears not I, American; it hears I, Israeli or I, the Jew.
That situation came about thanks to both the overt and the
stealthy work of the Jewish lobby in America which managed to shred the lives
and careers of the dissenters that tried to oppose it while infiltrating the
strategic positions in the country, and taking them over. Meanwhile, the Jewish
lobby in America being no more than an arm of World Jewry, a similar phenomenon
was duplicated on the world stage where the main beneficiaries have been Israel
and the moguls who may live anywhere in the world, yet make Israel their second
homeland if not the preferred one.
Haass hints at the role that Israel plays in the wider scheme of
things. But before making his point as clear as it can be, he first seeks to
justify it. To this end, he writes: “The administration's commitment to
resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is difficult to justify … The
emergence of a Palestinian state wouldn't affect the troubling events in Syria , Egypt
or Iraq .”
What? Was this the goal of the charade they staged about giving the
Palestinians a state of their own? Was it simply to affect the neighboring
states?
This being the reality, you seek to find out who might have
been the intended beneficiary of that satanic charade. So you keep reading:
“The one vital undertaking in the Middle East pursued energetically is to place
a ceiling on its [Iran 's]
nuclear capacity and potential … ratcheting up sanctions against Iran . The
challenge will be to come up with an agreement that is enough for Iran and not too much for us and for Israel .” This
then has been and remains the intended beneficiary. It is Israel , only Israel
and no one but Israel .
Besides that, did they get America
to do more for Israel ?
Yes they did. In fact, it was to serve Israel
that America
intruded in the affairs of the Middle Eastern nations, messing them up and
breaking its own back in a way that cannot be repaired. And yet, America had
evidence all along to the effect that there was a better way to doing things.
Now that the Jewish method has failed, Haass tells all about the better way,
and cites the reasons why America must now go back to it: “There is a good deal
of evidence, including Chile, Mexico, the Philippines and South Korea, that
gradual reform is less expensive, more likely to result in an open society, and
less likely to result in death.” Only now do they admit this? What a crime!
Sadly, the Jewish lobby made America
shelve this better way in favor of bombing Israel 's neighbors, bribing them,
corrupting them, plotting against them and coercing them into doing things in
line with Jewish demands and Israeli interests. This is why the nations of the
world do not want to see America
anywhere near their neighborhood. It is also why the American people want to
concentrate on building their country rather than build up Israel by
destroying someone else. And this is why Israel and World Jewry are frantically
calling on America whose back is already broken to do more of the same old,
same old till it breaks its neck too.
And yet, in the middle of this avalanche of crimes, the
current administration has managed to extricate the nation from two wars, avoid
getting dragged into another one despite the temptations and the pressures to
do so, and worked with a cool hand to rescue the economy from a depression that
came knocking not only at America's door but the door of the whole world.