Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced the other day that the United States would bring to bear a more sophisticated spectrum of mili-cop responses to illegal trafficking in elephant tusks and other endangered species. Such trafficking, she said, was not being done by the lone poachers of yore but was being conducted by sophisticated criminal organizations, which necessitated an equally organized and sophisticated response. The announcement was met with happy applause from the Green part of the political spectrum.
A more cynical ploy could hardly be imagined. Since when has Hillary be concerned about the environment? Not once in her lengthy and quite talkative career has she sounded off on the environment, much less given the ecological equivalent of "I Have a Dream..."
If Hillary has suddenly seen the light, how come the light doesn't shine on Japanese whaling, on Asian tiger poaching, on Mexican turtle slaughter on the decimation of bees or on any other bloody, murderous aspect of Man's poaching on his fellow creatures? How come the "response" is carefully tailored to fit what is primarily an African activity?
Let's be clear. Since Carter, the United States has cast its imperial eye on Africa. As implemented by Zbigniew Brzezinski, America's Africa policy was primarily geo-political, aimed at thwarting the Soviet Union and its proxies. However, under Bill Clinton, America's "concern" for African health and human rights was a cover for economic penetration and exploitation. This policy is in full swing now. The United States wants to "open" up Africa to Western "development" -- i.e. it wants to plunder the shit out of its resources with the use of a cheap and plentiful pool of labour.
Tired of Central America, the United States has now focused on creating a Banana Continent.
Of course, to do this, it is necessary to remove all those so-called terrorists organizations that just might want to control resources for their own national ends. In other words the Neo Con strategy of bringing full spectrum mili-cop devastation and control is being brought to bear on Africa.
The pogey bait being tossed to the environmental left is tantalizing. It is certainly technologically true that Chinook helicopters and infra-red cameras can be used effectively to detect and blow away caravans of poachers sneaking under jungle cover with the cargo of their slaughter. It was certainly juridically true that once pro-Western institutions were established in Afghanistan in place of the Taliban, women would be freed from the veil and allowed the full spectrum of Western Opportunities for social equality and economic advancement.
But somehow what is "certainly" true in theory never materializes in fact. Has America's very technological, very militarized "War on Drugs" stopped the cultivation, harvesting, packaging, running and street sale of narotics? No. No. And No again. It is a total failure on all fronts.
America's solutions are in fact poisons. They have a deceptive allure that operates only on a simplistic, mechanical level without any appreciation of the nuances and subtleties of actual and more fundamental causes.
The devastating failure of America's "Wars On..." is so obvious one has to ask if American leaders really fall for their own rhetoric? To a certain extent the leadership within any system is intellectually nurtured and limited by the system's modus intellecti. But while some colonel or general might truly think that peace can be obtained at the tip of a rifle barrel, Ivy Boys in think tanks and policy boiler rooms can't all be that stupid. They are bright and they are cynical. Our fellow creatures will not benefit from this policy any more than our fellow humans benefitted from "Enduring Freedom". Pray for the elephants.
A more cynical ploy could hardly be imagined. Since when has Hillary be concerned about the environment? Not once in her lengthy and quite talkative career has she sounded off on the environment, much less given the ecological equivalent of "I Have a Dream..."
If Hillary has suddenly seen the light, how come the light doesn't shine on Japanese whaling, on Asian tiger poaching, on Mexican turtle slaughter on the decimation of bees or on any other bloody, murderous aspect of Man's poaching on his fellow creatures? How come the "response" is carefully tailored to fit what is primarily an African activity?
Let's be clear. Since Carter, the United States has cast its imperial eye on Africa. As implemented by Zbigniew Brzezinski, America's Africa policy was primarily geo-political, aimed at thwarting the Soviet Union and its proxies. However, under Bill Clinton, America's "concern" for African health and human rights was a cover for economic penetration and exploitation. This policy is in full swing now. The United States wants to "open" up Africa to Western "development" -- i.e. it wants to plunder the shit out of its resources with the use of a cheap and plentiful pool of labour.
Tired of Central America, the United States has now focused on creating a Banana Continent.
Of course, to do this, it is necessary to remove all those so-called terrorists organizations that just might want to control resources for their own national ends. In other words the Neo Con strategy of bringing full spectrum mili-cop devastation and control is being brought to bear on Africa.
The pogey bait being tossed to the environmental left is tantalizing. It is certainly technologically true that Chinook helicopters and infra-red cameras can be used effectively to detect and blow away caravans of poachers sneaking under jungle cover with the cargo of their slaughter. It was certainly juridically true that once pro-Western institutions were established in Afghanistan in place of the Taliban, women would be freed from the veil and allowed the full spectrum of Western Opportunities for social equality and economic advancement.
But somehow what is "certainly" true in theory never materializes in fact. Has America's very technological, very militarized "War on Drugs" stopped the cultivation, harvesting, packaging, running and street sale of narotics? No. No. And No again. It is a total failure on all fronts.
America's solutions are in fact poisons. They have a deceptive allure that operates only on a simplistic, mechanical level without any appreciation of the nuances and subtleties of actual and more fundamental causes.
The devastating failure of America's "Wars On..." is so obvious one has to ask if American leaders really fall for their own rhetoric? To a certain extent the leadership within any system is intellectually nurtured and limited by the system's modus intellecti. But while some colonel or general might truly think that peace can be obtained at the tip of a rifle barrel, Ivy Boys in think tanks and policy boiler rooms can't all be that stupid. They are bright and they are cynical. Our fellow creatures will not benefit from this policy any more than our fellow humans benefitted from "Enduring Freedom". Pray for the elephants.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment