Military Review

Noam Chomsky: America rules the world? The answer is not so obvious (The Guardian, UK)

30
Noam Chomsky: America rules the world? The answer is not so obvious (The Guardian, UK)



Entangled on all sides by problems, America is losing global power and influence, and world public opinion is turning into a “second superpower”.

By asking the question of who rules the world, we tend to believe the standard of the thesis that the main actors in international affairs are the states, and mainly the great powers. Therefore, we primarily consider their decisions and the existing relations between them. It's right. But we should also bear in mind that this level of abstraction can be quite misleading.

Of course, states have a complex internal structure, and internal concentration of power greatly affects the elections and decisions of their political leadership, when the population as a whole finds itself on the sidelines and is deprived of any influence. This happens even in the most democratic societies, and for the rest this situation is an obvious given. We cannot get a real idea of ​​who rules the world, ignoring the “masters of humanity,” as Adam Smith called them. In his time these were the merchants and industrialists of England; in our times these are multinational diversified corporations, huge financial institutions, retail empires, and the like.


But following Smith, it would not be superfluous to consider the "base principle" that guides "the masters of mankind": "Everything is for itself and nothing for others." In other words, it is the doctrine of a sharp and endless class war, which is often one-sided, causing harm to the population of the countries and the world as a whole.

In today's world order, the rulers of mankind institutions have enormous power, not only internationally, but also within their states. They rely on these institutions in the protection of their government and in providing economic support in many different ways.

When we think about the role of the hosts of humanity, we will definitely turn to the current state policy priorities such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership. This is one of the agreements on the rights of investors, which in propaganda and comments is falsely called the “free trade agreement”. Such agreements are confidential, and only hundreds of corporate lawyers and lobbyists who prescribe the most important details have access to them. The goal here is to take them in an expedited manner, in Stalin, eliminating the discussion and giving the opportunity to say only "yes" or "no" (because of which it always turns out "yes").

Authors of such agreements very succeed, which is not surprising. And the people? They are not essential. The consequences of this can be easily predicted.

second superpower

The neoliberal programs of the last generation helped to concentrate power and wealth in the hands of small groups, and at the same time, they have undermined functioning democracy. But because of this, also I woke up and indignant opposition, most notably in Latin America, as well as in the global power centers.

The European Union (EU), which became one of the most promising projects after World War II, was on the verge of destruction due to the most serious consequences of the policy of belt-tightening during the recession, which is condemned even the economists of the International Monetary Fund (but not the political forces of the fund series).

Democracy in Europe is weakened, and the decision-making process has moved to Brussels, where he took over the officials. A northern banks discard them his long shadow.

Leading directions center parties quickly lose their members, who are moving either to the right or to the left. The executive director of the Paris-based research group EuropaNova explains this general disappointment with “the mood of evil powerlessness, as the real opportunity to influence the course of events escaped from the hands of national political leaders [who should in principle be subject to democratic politics] and passed into the hands of the market, European Union institutions and corporations” - quite in the spirit of the neoliberal doctrine.

Very similar processes occur in the United States, and for similar reasons. And it is a matter of great importance, it is important not only for the country but for the whole world by virtue of American power.

Strengthening the opposition to the neoliberal onslaught brings to the fore another very important aspect of standard conventional wisdom, when society is pushed aside, often disagreeing with the role of the spectator (and not the participant) that has been approved for him by liberal democratic theory. Such disobedience is always of concern to the ruling class. Following the spirit and letter of the American storiesGeorge Washington considered commoners "dirty and disgusting people showing inexplicable folly in their lower class."

In his book Violent Politics, which has become a brilliant review of the rebel movements, beginning with the American Revolution and ending with modern Iraq and Afghanistan, William Polk concludes that General Washington “wanted so much to push aside those militias he despised that this man almost decided to lose the revolution. " In fact, “he could have done this”, if not for the active intervention of France, which “saved the revolution”. Up to that point, partisans, whom we call today “terrorists”, were victorious in it. And the British-style Washington Army lost the battle over and over again and nearly lost the war. ”

The common feature of a successful insurgency, Polk writes, is that after a victory, popular support weakens, and the leadership begins to suppress "dirty and disgusting people" who actually won the war with their guerrilla tactics and methods of terror. It does this out of fear, fearing that commoners will defy class privileges. Over the years, the contempt of the elite towards the “lower class” of these people takes on many different forms.

Nowadays, a call to passivity and obedience (“moderation in democracy”), which liberal internationalists advocate, has become one of the forms of such contempt, reacting in this way to the dangerous consequences of the 1960 popular movements expressed in democratization.

Sometimes states still prefer to follow public opinion, which causes a huge rage and outrage at government centers. One of the most dramatic cases occurred in 2003, when the Bush administration demanded from Turkey to join the invasion of Iraq.

95% of the population of Turkey opposed such a course of action, and to the amazement and dismay of Washington, the Turkish government supported the views of the people. Turkey was strongly condemned for such a refusal of responsible action. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, who was called by the press "commander in chief of idealism" in the American administration, in every way blasphemed the Turkish army for committing illegal actions and demanded an apology. The unperturbed and respected commentators, who were not very touched by this and other innumerable manifestations of our legendary “longing for democracy”, continued to praise President George W. Bush for his dedication to the cause of “promoting democracy” and sometimes criticizing him for his naive thinking and belief in that an outside power can impose its democratic aspirations on others.

Turkish society was not alone. Global opposition to US-British aggression was overwhelming. According to international polls, the level of support for Washington's war plans barely falls short of 10% in almost all countries. Such opposition has caused strong protests from around the world and in the United States. Perhaps it was the first time in history, when the imperial aggression roundly condemned even before its official start.

Journalist Patrick Tyler wrote in the New York Times that "there are two superpowers in the world: the United States of America and world public opinion."

Unprecedented protests in the United States became a manifestation of discontent aggression that began several decades earlier. Their participants criticized the US war in Indochina. This protest movement has become a large-scale and highly influential, although it is too late.

In the 1967 year, when the anti-war movement gained significant strength, military historian and Vietnamese specialist Bernard Fall (Bernard Fall) warned: "Vietnam as a cultural and historical education ... is threatened with complete destruction ... because the countryside of this country is literally perishing under the blows of the most powerful in the world military machine operating on an area of ​​this size. "

However, the anti-war movement has become a force that can not be ignored. And it could not ignore the actions of Ronald Reagan, who, after coming to power, determined to launch an attack on Central America. His administration has decided to follow the example of John F. Kennedy, who twenty years earlier started the war against South Vietnam. But she had to back out due to strong public protests, which were not in the early 1960-x.

That attack was scary enough. His victims have not recovered so far. But what happened in South Vietnam, and later in all of Indochina, where the “second superpower” began to protest against the conflict much later, was incomparably worse.

It is often said that the strong public opposition to the invasion of Iraq has not conceived his action. I think this statement is incorrect.

Undoubtedly, the invasion was quite horrible and terrible its consequences. Nevertheless, it could be much worse.

Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and the other high-ranking officials in the Bush administration could not even think about the measures, which 40 years earlier went to President Kennedy and President Lindon Dzhonson, as they know that this will cause protests.

Western Power under pressure

Of course, much can be said about the factors determining state policy, which are set aside when we adhere to the standard idea that states are actors in international affairs. But even with such non-trivial reservations, we can accept this view, at least as a first approximation to reality. In this case, the question of who rules the world will immediately lead to fears about the strengthening of Chinese power and the challenge that Beijing is throwing the United States and the "world order" about the new Cold War, quietly smoldering in Eastern Europe, the global war on terror, American hegemony and American decadence, as well as other similar concerns.

The challenges that Western power faced at the beginning of 2016 of the year were covered in the generally accepted framework by the Financial Times chief commentator on international affairs, Gideon Rachman. He began with a review of the Western picture of the world order: “Since the end of the Cold War, the overwhelming power of the American armed forces has been central to international politics.”

This is of particular importance in three regions: in East Asia, where “the US Navy is used to treat the Pacific Ocean as an“ American lake ”, in Europe, where NATO (read - the United States, which share as much as three-quarters of NATO military spending) guarantees the territorial integrity of its member countries, and in the Middle East, where there are giant naval and air bases of the United States, in order to "reassure friends and intimidate enemies."

The problem of today's world order, Rahman continues, is that "in all three regions, this established security procedure is challenged." Russia intervened in Ukraine and Syria, and China turned the nearby seas from an American lake into “disputed waters.”

Thus, the fundamental question of international relations is whether the United States should recognize that other major powers in their regions should also have certain zones of influence. ” Rahman believes that they should, because of "the dispersal of economic power around the world - in combination with simple common sense."

Of course, the world can be viewed from different angles. But let us confine ourselves to the three regions, which are certainly very important.

Call today: East Asia

Let's start with the "American Lake". There may be some surprise at the message that appeared in mid-December 2015 that “the American B-52 bomber, which carried out a routine flight over the South China Sea, unintentionally flew into a two-mile zone over the artificial island built by China”. The fact is that, according to representatives of the military department, this caused “sharp contradictions between Washington and Beijing.”

Familiar with the grim history of the 70 nuclear era, people are well aware that incidents of this kind often lead the world to a dangerous line of nuclear war, threatening complete annihilation. You do not need to be a supporter of provocative and aggressive actions of the PRC in the South China Sea, in order to note that this incident did not occur with a Chinese nuclear bomber in the Caribbean or off the coast of California. China does not claim to create a “Chinese lake” in these regions. Fortunately for the whole world.

Chinese leaders are well aware that their maritime trade routes are surrounded by hostile powers, for example, Japan in the Straits of Malacca and other places, and that these hostile powers are supported by compelling US military power. Accordingly, China is implementing its expansion westward very carefully, putting a major investment and implementing actions designed for integration.

In particular, these actions are carried out within the framework of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which includes the countries of Central Asia and Russia, and soon will enter India and Pakistan. Iran in this organization is an observer, and the United States in this status was denied. They were also asked to close all military bases in the region. China is building a modern version of the ancient Silk Road, intending not only to unite the region under its influence, but also to enter Europe and the oil producing regions of the Middle East. Beijing invests a lot of money in the creation of an integrated energy and commercial system in Asia, and also builds numerous high-speed railways and pipelines.

One component of this program is the construction of the highway, which will pass to the highest mountains in the world to the Chinese-built Gwadar port in Pakistan. This port will protect the oil supplies from possible US intervention.

China and Pakistan hope that this program will also help accelerate the development of industry in Pakistan’s territory and give Islamabad additional incentives to suppress domestic terrorism, which also creates problems for China in the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region. The United States, which provides Pakistan with extensive military assistance, does not deal with economic issues there. Gwadar will become for China part of the "pearl thread" in the composition of several bases that are being built in the Indian Ocean for commercial purposes, but which can also have military applications. According to estimates for the future, China will be able, over time, to demonstrate its military might even in the Persian Gulf, which will be the first time for it in modern history.

The overwhelming US military power is protected from all of these actions, unless there is a nuclear war to the complete destruction, in which case the United States will also be destroyed.

In 2015, China has created Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, becoming its major shareholder. At the opening of the bank, which was held in June in Beijing, attended by 56 countries, including US allies Australia, Britain, and others. They did this in spite of Washington's wishes. The US and Japan was not there.

Some analysts believe that the new bank could create competition Bretton Woods institutions (IMF and World Bank), in which the United States has the right of veto. There is also a calculation that the SCO will eventually become a counterweight to NATO.

Call today: Eastern Europe

Referring to the second region, Eastern Europe, where the border between Russia and NATO is brewing crisis. This is a very important point.

In his instructive and prudent scientific study of this region called Frontline Ukraine - Crisis in the Borderlands (Frontline Ukraine - Crisis on the Border), Richard Sakwa very convincingly writes that “the Russian-Georgian war in August 2008 of the year, according to in fact, it was the first war to stop the expansion of NATO. " Ukrainian crisis 2014, the second such war. It is not clear whether humanity will survive a third war. "

The West believes that NATO expansion is beneficial. It is not surprising that Russia, as well as most of the “global south”, has a different opinion on this subject, like that of some influential Western experts. George Kennan at the outset warned that NATO expansion was a “tragic mistake”, and was joined by high-ranking American statesmen who wrote an open letter to the White House, in which they called the alliance's promotion “political mistake of historical scope”.

The current crisis began in the 1991 year, when the cold war ended and the Soviet Union collapsed. At that time there were two opposing views on the new security system and on the political economy of Eurasia. According to Sakwa, one concept called for “the expansion of Europe”, in the center of which was to be “the European Union with the adjacent Euro-Atlantic military and political community. On the other hand, there was the idea of ​​a large continental Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok with many centers, including Brussels, Moscow and Ankara, but with a common goal - to overcome the differences that have long pursued the continent. ”

The main supporter of big Europe was the Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. This concept had European roots in de Gaulle’s political movement and in other initiatives. But when Russia began to collapse under the pressure of the devastating market reforms of 1990, this concept faded. It began to revive with the restoration of Russia, which began to look for its place in the international arena under Vladimir Putin, who, together with his associate Dmitry Medvedev, repeatedly called for the geopolitical unification of all of big Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok in order to create a true "strategic partnership".

These initiatives were met with “polite contempt,” Sakwa writes, since they were considered “no more than a cover for the secret revival of“ great Russia ”and a split in relations between North America and Western Europe. Such concern originates in the earlier fears of the Cold War over the fact that Europe can become a “third force”, independent of the great and small superpowers, but gradually moving closer to the latter (this can be traced to Willy Brandt and other initiatives) .

The West reacted to the collapse of Russia with triumphalism. This collapse was greeted, calling it “the end of history” and the final victory of Western capitalist democracy, as if Russia was instructed to return to the status it had before World War I, and again become an economic colony of the West.

The expansion of NATO began without delay, in violation of Gorbachev’s verbal assurances that the Alliance’s forces would not move east even when the Soviet leader agreed to unify Germany’s membership in NATO. It was a striking concession in the light of historical events. During the discussion, the parties spoke about East Germany. The possibility of expanding the alliance outside of Germany with Gorbachev was not discussed even in private.

Soon NATO really went beyond the borders of Germany and came close to the borders of Russia. The main mission of NATO was officially replaced, and now the alliance has received a mandate to protect the "critical infrastructure" of the global energy system, sea routes and pipelines. Thus, the zone of action of NATO has become global. Further, in accordance with the concept of NATO, which was completely revised by the West, its doctrine declared a “duty to protect”, which contrasts sharply with the official version of the UN. Now, NATO can act as an interventionist force under US command.

Of particular concern to Russia are plans to move NATO to Ukraine. These plans were publicly announced at the NATO summit in Bucharest in April 2008, when Georgia and Ukraine were promised prospective membership in the alliance. The wording was unambiguous: “NATO welcomes the Euro-Atlantic aspirations of Ukraine and Georgia to join the alliance. Today we agreed that these countries will join NATO. "

When the pro-Western candidates won in Ukraine’s 2004 revolution of the year, State Department spokesman Daniel Fried hurried there, stressing that “the United States supports Ukraine’s aspirations to join NATO and the Euro-Atlantic community.”

Russia's concerns can be easily understood. They were outlined by foreign affairs specialist John Mearsheimer in the leading journal of the American establishment, Foreign Affairs. He wrote that “the pivotal cause of the current crisis [in Ukraine] is the expansion of NATO and Washington’s desire to divert Ukraine from the Moscow orbit, integrating it with the West.” Putin considered this a "direct threat to Russia's key interests."

“Who can blame him?” Asks Mirshaymer, pointing out that “Washington may not like Moscow’s position, but he must understand its logic.” It is not very difficult. In the end, as everyone knows, "the United States cannot accept the fact that the distant great powers deploy their armed forces anywhere in the Western Hemisphere, and even more so on their borders."

In fact, the United States takes a much tougher stance. They cannot reconcile with what is officially called “successful disobedience” of the Monroe Doctrine of 1823 of the year, which proclaimed (so far not implemented) US control over the Western Hemisphere. A small country, daring to demonstrate such a successful disobedience, can be subjected to all the "punishments of the earth", as well as a powerful embargo - what happened to Cuba.

We do not need to ask how the United States would react, enter the countries of Latin America in the Warsaw Pact, and start Mexico and Canada to consider this possibility. Even the slightest hint of the first test step in this direction would have been stopped with “maximum rigidity”, to put it in CIA terminology.

As in the case of China, do not need to have a positive opinion for an understanding of the logic of Putin's motives and actions toward them. It is important to understand this logic, instead it send to his curse. As in the case of China, the rate is extremely high. There literally is a question of survival.

Call today: the Islamic world

Now let us turn to the third region is of great concern. It is the Islamic world (mainly), as well as the scene of the global war on terror, which is in the 2001 11, after the terrorist attacks in September declared George W. Bush. More precisely, re-announced.

Global war on terror declared coming to power the Reagan administration. She frantically rant about "the plague spread by vicious opponents of civilization itself" (the words of Reagan) and about "returning to barbarism in the modern era" (the words of its Secretary of State George Schulz).

The original global war on terror was quietly removed from history. It was quickly turned into a brutal and destructive terrorist war that hit Central America, southern Africa and the Middle East. The dark consequences of this transformation we still feel today. Because of this, the United States was even condemned by the United Nations International Court of Justice (which Washington did not listen to). In any case, this war was on the wrong side of history, and therefore it was quietly "gone."

The success of the Bush-Obama version of the global war on terror can be easily assessed by direct examination. When this war was declared, the targets for defeat were limited to a small corner of tribal Afghanistan. The terrorists were defended by Afghans, who for the most part disliked them and despised them, but were forced to give shelter according to the tribal code of hospitality. This puzzled the Americans when the poor peasants refused to "surrender Osama for an astronomical sum of 25 million dollars for them."

There is every reason to believe that in the case of a carefully organized police operation or even serious diplomatic negotiations with the Taliban, suspected of committing crimes 11 September could well have been betrayed to American justice. But this option was not even considered. Reflexes turned on instead, and large-scale violence was preferred. But not to overthrow the Taliban (it came later), but to demonstrate American contempt for the Taliban's conditional offers about the possible extradition of Osama bin Laden.

We do not know how serious these proposals were, since nobody has ever considered them. Or maybe the United States simply decided to "show its muscles, win and intimidate everyone in the world." They don't care about the suffering of the Afghans and how many people we will lose. ”

This is the opinion of the respected warlord and opponent of the Taliban Abdul Haq (Abdul Haq), one of the many opponents of the American bombardment, launched in October 2001 of the year. He called these bombings a “big obstacle” for attempts by his supporters to overthrow the Taliban from the inside, believing that such a task was within their reach.

His point of view was confirmed by Richard Clark (Richard A Clarke), who was in the White House under President George W. Bush as chairman of the Counter-Terrorism Security Group, when plans were made to attack Afghanistan. Clark recalled that at one of the meetings, when the president was informed that the attack would violate international law, he shouted in a small meeting room: "I don’t care what the international lawyers say, we still kill some people for ass." Leading aid organizations that worked in Afghanistan also resolutely opposed the attacks. They warned that millions of people are on the verge of starvation, and that the consequences can be dire.

I hardly need to remind you what years later were these unfortunate consequences for Afghanistan.

Further, under the sledgehammer of America came to Iraq.

The American-British invasion, carried out without any plausible excuse, is the gravest crime of the 21 century. This attack caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in a country where civil society was already destroyed by American and British sanctions. The two eminent diplomats who introduced them called these sanctions "genocide" and resigned in protest. The invasion led to the emergence of millions of refugees, destroyed most of the country and provoked an interfaith conflict, which today tears apart Iraq and the entire Middle Eastern region. This is a monstrous fact in our intellectual and moral culture, although the informed and enlightened circles called it affectionately and affectionately - “the liberation of Iraq”.

Surveys of the Pentagon and the British Ministry of Defense showed that only three percent of Iraqis admit that the actions of the American military in their country are legitimate, and less than one percent believe that the “coalition” of American and British forces benefited their security. At the same time, 80% opposed the presence of coalition forces in Iraq, while most supported attacks on coalition forces. Afghanistan has been destroyed to such an extent that it is simply impossible to conduct reliable polls there; however, there are indications that the relationship there is about the same. In Iraq, the United States suffered a crushing defeat, abandoned its official military goals, and left the country under the pressure of the only winner, who became Iran.

His sledge hammer waving US and elsewhere, above all, in Libya, in which the three traditional imperial powers (Britain, France and the United States) received the Security Council resolution number 1973 and then it broke, sending its air force to help the rebels.

As a result, the possibility of a peaceful settlement through negotiations disappeared, losses sharply increased (at least 10 times, as indicated by political scientist Alan Kuperman), Libya turned into ruins, was in the hands of the warring factions, and recently became the basis for "Islamic state", which uses its territory for the implementation of terror.

As African expert Alex de Waal (Alex de Waal) notes, the imperial triumvirate ignored the very reasonable diplomatic proposals of the African Union. Huge flows weapons and jihadists flowed into western Africa (which is now the leader in terrorist killings) and into the eastern Mediterranean, causing the spread of terror and violence. And because of the NATO attacks, refugee flows poured from Africa into Europe.

This is another triumph of "humanitarian intervention." As the long and often dismal history shows, there is nothing unusual in this, since everything started four centuries ago.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/may/09/noam-chomsky-who-rules-the-world-us-foregin-policy
30 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. with
    with 17 May 2016 13: 47
    +4
    A clear understanding of a simple truth is needed - embedding countries "by rank, weight, fat" in Pax Americana is possible if the countries themselves want it. Or pro-American politicians push them there, using numerous manipulations, forgeries, etc. We generally approve of the next operation of information cover for the next robbery in the American way. This is a classic "money pyramid", in which the founders reap the fruits of their own and others' labor, and the lower tiers hope to someday get hold of, like Lenya Golubkov. Capitalism, nothing personal ...
    1. Seren
      Seren 17 May 2016 14: 43
      0
      Noam Chomsky is a textbook example of an anti-Semitic Jew who hates his people. He officially calls for the destruction of the state of Israel. A persona non grata in Israel. A great friend of Islamic terror of different spills. Here they are, Jews hating)))
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. cniza
        cniza 17 May 2016 15: 27
        +3
        The USA has overstrained and their century is rapidly dropping.
        1. Tatyana
          Tatyana 17 May 2016 17: 26
          +1
          Very good REVIEW fresh article by the author!
          I read it carefully and with interest.

          To author +
        2. The comment was deleted.
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. Altona
        Altona 17 May 2016 15: 33
        +8
        Quote: seren
        Noam Chomsky is a textbook example of an anti-Semitic Jew who hates his people. He officially calls for the destruction of the state of Israel. A persona non grata in Israel. A great friend of Islamic terror of different spills. Here they are, Jews hating)))

        -----------------------
        Regardless of the author's personality, and even more so to his origin, it was interesting to read. The fact is that the United States itself has lost its statehood in the classical sense and is now only a platform for influential financial and industrial groups, transnational corporations. These groups need a quasi-empire on a global scale, where a person is a cog and an insect, trembling, crushed by loans and mortgages. Decisions are made secretly, at the top, by the Washington consensus. Alternative opinions are not considered and even harmful. For this, states must be destroyed, and at the same time international law will collapse. And states must be embedded in blocs and alliances controlled by the United States. In general, the liberal era, in principle, has ended and the world is moving by leaps and bounds into the era of global fascism. Russia is no exception, so that the authorities do not squeak there; in fact, the little man does not bother them. So the "end of the Fukuyama story" never happened. Therefore, opinions are now polarizing and the center is falling apart, because they demand to decide whether you are with the monopolies and oligarchs, or you are for genuine democracy and people's rights, and not their flawed surrogate, pulled out by the propaganda machine when it is convenient. By the way, the "golden billion" successfully shrinks like a shagreen skin to several million, the rest is destined for the role of biomass - powerless, dehumanized by transhumanism, tolerance and other fascist delights.
      5. SklochPensioner
        SklochPensioner 17 May 2016 15: 42
        +1
        Quote: seren
        a textbook example of an anti-Semitic Jew who hates his people.

        The fact that he is torn from the roots is noticeable. Hence the attempt to be OVER global problems (a man of the World, not otherwise)))
        As a result, he wrote pieces of his unfinished thoughts in the article, a mechanic Polesov, damn it)
        1. altel
          altel 18 May 2016 18: 44
          0
          Like a locksmith Polesov. He graduated from the University of Pennsylvania, worked at Harvard, defended his doctorate at the University of Pennsylvania and teaches at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. For a time he lived in Israel. But he became disillusioned and left (in his words "because of the atmosphere of nationalism and hostile ideology). in the field of linguistics and psychology. Received about 12 international awards and medals for his work. Where to skloch pensionera with a vocational school diploma
      6. altel
        altel 18 May 2016 18: 17
        0
        Why is the Jew Naom Chomsky, a respected person in the United States who does not accept Zionism (Jewish nationalism) and therefore is bad? After all, according to the Talmud, you are forbidden to create a secular (non-religious) state, live at enmity with neighbors and have an army? Why is the nationalism of other nations bad Why Russian-speaking Jews who were born and studied in the multinational USSR and Russia, having left for Israel, suddenly suddenly become fans of the United States and nationalists, although they have not seen Arabs in the eyes before? But Arabs are your cousins! ?? "A Jewish nationalist is a ready agent of the West" (I. Stalin, after the trial of the Jewish anti-fascist committee)
  2. Dmitry Potapov
    Dmitry Potapov 17 May 2016 13: 48
    +4
    The navel is torn! It was clear after the Crimea. The most interesting thing is that they brought themselves under it, they wanted to push all fingers into their mouths, everything according to Lavrov.
    1. Altona
      Altona 17 May 2016 16: 03
      +5
      Quote: Dmitry Potapov
      The navel is torn! It was clear after the Crimea.

      --------------------------------
      A wounded beast is no less dangerous. The US includes all the "tumblers" to influence world events. And the US has more "influence tumblers" than ours. Sanctions, offshore, athletes, Eurovision, oil, dollars, central banks-FRS, NATO-EU, servers on their territory, NSA-CIA, corrupt politicians, international mass media, own jurisdiction above international and others. In general, a huge toolkit for non-military pressure.
  3. Magic archer
    Magic archer 17 May 2016 13: 48
    +8
    It’s interestingly written. I first read the article by this author. Everything is sensible and on the shelves. A big plus. I’ll add from myself. EU will fall apart sooner or later. Waves of emigrants, poverty, religious and political differences will do their job. And there will not be a new Warsaw Treaty there around the corner.IMHO
  4. godofwar6699
    godofwar6699 17 May 2016 13: 56
    +5
    [quote = Dmitry Potapov] The navel is torn! It was clear after the Crimea.

    don’t you understand that Russia has lost Ukraine?
    1. BLOND
      BLOND 17 May 2016 14: 33
      +3
      [quote = godofwar6699] [quote = Dmitry Potapov] The navel is torn! It was clear after the Crimea.

      don’t you understand that Russia has lost Ukraine? [/ quote]

      A little different ...
      Ukraine as a state is gone
      1. Tatyana
        Tatyana 17 May 2016 18: 05
        +1
        godofwar6699
        don’t you understand that Russia has lost Ukraine?

        And here V.V. Zhirinovsky another opinion!
        You, americans, alex, have a sense and usefulness to listen to him.
        We, Russians, do not agree with you, although it is very difficult for us in relations with Ukrainians now.

        See "Zhirinovsky about UKRAINE. New. He said everything right." Published: 11 apr. 2015
    2. 33 Watcher
      33 Watcher 17 May 2016 14: 41
      +3
      [quote = godofwar6699] [quote = Dmitry Potapov] The navel is torn! It was clear after the Crimea.

      don’t you understand that Russia has lost Ukraine? [/ quote]

      Well, let's say ... But what was Ukraine for Russia before ..?
      For the umpteenth time I analyze our relations with Ukraine, after the collapse of the USSR, and apart from the "weight on the leg", no analogies come to mind.
    3. Who
      Who 17 May 2016 14: 53
      +7
      But is Russia a fascist Ukraine, this vicious beggar-ragger, craving only freebies, needed?
  5. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 17 May 2016 13: 57
    +7
    For Chomsky, a surprisingly reasonable article.
    At the age of 90, he "settled down".
    There was a long period when he was completely insane
    but "genius is forgivable."
    1. Seren
      Seren 17 May 2016 14: 47
      +5
      Quote: voyaka uh
      surprisingly reasonable article.
      At the age of 90, he "settled down".
      There was a long period when he was completely insane
      but "genius is forgivable."



      The old man is not the same, even Israel did not curse in this article :-)
      1. Corsair
        Corsair 17 May 2016 17: 17
        0
        Quote: voyaka uh
        For Chomsky, a surprisingly reasonable article.
        At the age of 90, he "settled down".

        Quote: seren
        The old man is not the same, even Israel did not curse in this article :-)

        laughing Maybe there is something to curse? You, too, often think that you are not less than the Americans, the "chosen ones", the shepherds, so to speak, of humanity.
      2. Hello
        Hello 17 May 2016 17: 38
        +1
        Quote: seren
        The old man is not the same, even Israel did not curse in this article :-)

        Probably forgot, in the next article he will curse twice laughing
        In general, the article from the chef section is all gone and how scary to live. You can only sympathize. crying
      3. Stas157
        Stas157 18 May 2016 15: 21
        +2
        Quote: seren
        The old man is not the same, even Israel did not curse in this article :-)

        Article plus. A very adequate and balanced assessment of what is happening. I do not know what the author wrote about Israel, but most likely also objectively and thoughtfully. Well, a person cannot write about everything correctly, but not about Israel correctly! For more of these, right, the Jews!
    2. Asadullah
      Asadullah 17 May 2016 14: 59
      +5
      but "genius is forgivable"


      The most sane thing is a caricature. Otherwise, a brain disease caused by the "pain of loss".

      Let's take a look at the "calls". The Chinese "challenge", how can one understand the pumping of the PRC by American investments at a time when China was Diangseoping's poor and skinny cow? What was the goal, to develop a bourgeois spark in the souls of the Han and to destroy the country using the Tianan Min Guachang method? As a result, the PRC has become the most powerful world power, with the most advanced system of social science. Moreover, China is the most beautiful country, with the most modern cities and practical ideal management of those in world practice.

      Russian "challenge". It so happened that the collapse of the USSR coincided with a change in the political generation in the United States, which did not think of anything better than the mediocrity of ruling the CPSU in the country to credit itself. For ten years they looked at the collapsed, smoldering country and giggled, enjoying the fantastic properties attributed to themselves. If then integrate Russia into NATO, into the European orbit of economy and influence, today the Russian Federation would be something like a great Poland. But the Western elite chose a different path, they made an enemy out of Russia. And once you've done it, get it. Get a mobilization economy, get a sharp recovery in the military industry, get the unity of the people rallying in front of such a challenge, bless the memory of the war is alive in every family. What's wrong Noam? Wanted an enemy, get it. And from Assadullah personally, this is the enemy that you will not stop with anything, there is no worse enemy who wanted to be your friend. And now it is already irreparable, just like the inexorable power of China.

      Islamic "challenge"? Do not make me laugh. Thirty years of unsuccessful attempts to rally individual Islamic radicals and direct them in their own interests, each time receiving a slap in the face, what's this? Strategy? Tactics? St. Patrick's Irish Rake Dance? To incite and intensify terrorism throughout the world and to fight it unsuccessfully, a challenge? Yes, any sane and educated person cannot understand the purpose of such and the only thing that can be voiced and not even voiced, because this dumb question is on everyone's lips, why ???

      All the challenges of the United States can be formulated in one picture: the insane doused himself with shit, and screams that it stinks. Civilization develops according to its thermodynamic laws, everything is extremely simple in them, the weak perishes, the stupid and strong gradually lose their strength, due to their stupidity, and become weak.
  6. Pyokhar
    Pyokhar 17 May 2016 13: 58
    +3
    It is not known for whom this article was written: if for a rational person, then he knows everything and so - there is nothing new in the written. If for the American-European fool, then he doesn’t care about the drum.
    And so - to the author plus.
  7. Knizhnik
    Knizhnik 17 May 2016 14: 20
    +3
    "Do you know who this powerful old man is?"

    Not, in fact, an interesting guy, there would be more of them.
  8. Yarik76
    Yarik76 17 May 2016 14: 30
    +2
    Article plus' reasonable statement of facts!
  9. Romin
    Romin 17 May 2016 14: 51
    +3
    I didn’t want to, but, unfortunately, objectively at this stage in the development of the world order, I don’t notice something that the states have lost their influence!
    And it is a fact! Globally they only increase their power and will increase!
    What a bad habit to underestimate rivals.
    Economically, staff members are doing everything right: they put out offshores, created a transatlantic partnership ...
    They react in accordance with all realities and the future.
    And if you have not noticed yet, the Americans adhere to the concept of a reasonable decentralization of capital, assets and do not concentrate all their power ...
    They carry out the same thing on the military-technical line, fully equip the allies, setting up their bases around the world.
    And think for yourself the facts, the facts, there are many of them.
    For example:
    What dollar removed from the world reserve currency?
    State GDP in the red?
    Revolution, coup, coup?
    Unstable political and economic situation or its background?

    All allies and Oriental mongrels take a visor under a click!
    What are military bases closing?
    Reduce the army? Fleet sell?
    Shipyards, do plants not work? Machines do not produce?

    What are you speaking about;)))))?!

    We need not watch how neighbors feel bad, but we must work, create industry anew, stimulate domestic sales, strengthen the ruble and untie it from the dollar!
    Putin created BRICS so what? The idea is cool! Super!
    But one thing that interests me is why we are doing BRICS, and we don’t work with neighbors (with whom the border is) and the CIS countries!
    Belarus itself did not recognize anything: neither Ossetia, nor Crimea!
    What the hell are we rushing to distant frontiers, without covered rear! What a torn thinking in foreign and domestic politics! Spit on corruption = standard of living. Those who ruined the USSR, worked with the CIA, are at the head of state-owned companies, nepotism and property flourish. In such a huge country, with rich resources and opportunities, people live worse than in Singapore and Taiwan ...
    1. Sid.74
      17 May 2016 16: 07
      +3
      Quote: Romin
      What dollar removed from the world reserve currency?

      What is it like? Will the USA take it and make themselves? laughing

      Quote: Romin
      State GDP in the red?

      US National Debt 110% of GDP ... request Some dubious plus .. not .. request
      Quote: Romin
      Revolution, coup, coup?

      I sincerely hope .. they will have everything ... there must be justice.

      Quote: Romin
      Unstable political and economic situation or its background?

      Presidential candidates Sanders Socialist Democrat and antiglobalist capitalist Trump .... stability is right in everything .. wassat

      Quote: Romin
      All allies and Oriental mongrels take a visor under a click!
      In Austria, the right won, who sympathize with Putin.
      In France, the right will soon become the leaders of the leaders. Lipin may become the president.

      In Germany, the alternative for Germany ranked third in the elections ... and in part they stand in solidarity with the left, who oh, how Merkel criticizes ..

      in Gibraltar, the Americans fired on a Spanish patrol boat. The Spaniards did not allow Minister of Foreign Affairs Velikobritaniya in their airspace.

      In Latvia, the Americans desecrated the flag of Latvia. Great Britain is preparing for Brexit, even the Queen agrees to the release of shavers from the EU ...

      Venice and the province of Veneto is going to vote for the recognition of the Crimea as part of Russia and the abolition of sanctions.

      Holland voted against European integration with Ukraine.
      The French parliament voted to lift the sanctions against Russia.

      Is this your unity?
    2. SklochPensioner
      SklochPensioner 17 May 2016 16: 21
      +4
      Quote: Romin
      Belarus itself did not recognize anything: neither Ossetia, nor Crimea!

      You have a funny comment: what are the strong states, where do we go to them, etc., "we need not look at how bad our neighbors are, but we need to work ...". Well, don't look, work! smile
      And as for Belarus, "which did not recognize anything," by God, neither Ossetia nor Crimea is hot and cold because of this. Father, it is clear why, maneuvers, maneuvers, hoping to catch, and we, together with Crimea, smile, looking at it) ...
  10. Polar Bear
    Polar Bear 17 May 2016 15: 33
    +1
    Not a bad article, but, as for me, somewhat exaggerated.
  11. Dmitry Potapov
    Dmitry Potapov 17 May 2016 16: 23
    +2
    Quote: Altona
    Quote: Dmitry Potapov
    The navel is torn! It was clear after the Crimea.

    --------------------------------
    A wounded beast is no less dangerous. The US includes all the "tumblers" to influence world events. And the US has more "influence tumblers" than ours. Sanctions, offshore, athletes, Eurovision, oil, dollars, central banks-FRS, NATO-EU, servers on their territory, NSA-CIA, corrupt politicians, international mass media, own jurisdiction above international and others. In general, a huge toolkit for non-military pressure.

    So what? The main factor, strength, they cannot use it, and so they revealed their full potential, then they themselves raised the bar very high, remember the words GDP, "you crossed the red line"! but after all, the GDP did not have much choice, if it were not for the Crimea, it is possible that the jump would not have passed to us, as for the loss of Ukraine, excuse the last 23 years, they were not any, or to remind the 90s when negotiations between the Russian Federation and Ukraine were held in English, because some did not know "MOV" and others did not want to speak "sk", or remind the "Buki" transferred to Georgia for rent before 08.08.08, or recall the "gas war" of 2009? I apologize in advance for saying about the loss of Ukraine, this does not apply to your comment, this refers to the visitor who wrote that with the acquisition of Crimea, we lost Ukraine, I can imagine how Ukraine would bend its fingers if Crimea (Sevastopol) was with her, about such a bargain and we would almost completely agree on both the gas price and the lease of Sevastopol (the port), but in the end we would still be "thrown" because the US would never allow bargaining with itself.
  12. cap
    cap 17 May 2016 17: 07
    +1
    “Thus, the fundamental question in international relations is whether the United States should recognize that other major powers in their regions should also have some kind of zones of influence.” Rahman believes that they should, due to the “dispersal of economic power around the world - in combination with simple common sense. "

    Rahman is certainly right in one thing, common sense is needed. Only anyone in the United States today has this gallery. Or does the staff have it? His (staff) do not publish everyone knows what or rather whom I mean.
  13. Haloperidol
    Haloperidol 17 May 2016 18: 01
    0
    USA is an evil empire!
  14. Cat
    Cat 17 May 2016 19: 08
    0
    Only the Anglo-Saxons can speak so much and for a long time plainly without saying anything new.
  15. itvs
    itvs 18 May 2016 14: 56
    0
    The most valuable thing in this article is the thesis that "masters of the world" and "states" are two different entities. And they should not be confused, otherwise the picture of what is happening will be greatly distorted.
  16. Denis Skiff
    Denis Skiff 19 May 2016 19: 31
    0
    Quote: seren
    Noam Chomsky is a textbook example of an anti-Semitic Jew who hates his people. He officially calls for the destruction of the state of Israel. A persona non grata in Israel. A great friend of Islamic terror of different spills. Here they are, Jews hating)))
    100 pluses. well done! that's how people of the same tribe can hate each other. and this hatred of madness will lead.