The Crisis — The Result of the Republicans’ Warmongering
In an interview with the Iranian Diplomacy news website, Dr. Mohammad-Ali Basiri, university scholar and international relations commentator, discusses the current U.S. crisis. He believes that “it is all a consequence of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.”
ID: The dispute and conflict over the U.S. debt issue has put the country in danger of an economic crisis and it has almost reached a deadlock. Where do you think this crisis is rooted?
Dr. MB: In general terms, for the past 100 years there has always been disagreements between the Democrats and Republicans — the pigeons and the hawks — over domestic and foreign policies. However, such disagreements most often begin to surface at times when the U.S. becomes involved in a war. You can track it back to the World Wars I and II, Vietnam and recently the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. And the main cause of all this current conflict in the U.S is rooted and should be looked for somewhere in the Republicans’ warmongering attitude.
Two factors imposed a huge financial burden on the U.S. economy; one is the neoconservative policy to establish U.S. hegemony in the world through focusing on a new Middle East and the other is the U.S. military campaign in Afghanistan and Iraq. The main part of the U.S. Federal Reserve currency has been spent on these latest two wars. The Democrats and Republicans have always pointed the finger of blame at the other over this issue in their respective party’s political disputes. So this is the most important reason behind the financial crisis.
Another factor is that in the past few decades, American investors have moved away from a market of production, goods and services to being one of a broker-dealership. In other words, because of the heavy competition China and India have already begun in production throughout the world, investing inside and outside of the United States has neither the desired profitability nor the bright future it once had for the majority of investors. Hence investors have transferred their capital, finances and investments to the dealership market. The shift of markets is seen in the oil and energy fields as well as in other areas. This all has led to a political stock market game and created an economy of only commerce and dealership with no focus on production. This in effect resulted in a false, pseudo-rise of prices in areas such as oil, energy and goods, etc. Owing to this, investors have made big fortunes. Therefore, a false bubble economy came to the surface. Although there have been some winners in the gamble of the stock market, a great many more of the investors and financiers have lost the game. And the real estate market has been the one to suffer most by such a false bubble economy.
Consequently, the tremendous amount of debt imposed on the banking system caused by the huge military expenses of the wars resulted in a trillion-dollar deficit. And it has provoked tensions between the Democratic and Republican parties.
ID: How differently would the Democrats and the Republicans confront this issue?
Dr. MB: The Democrats’ system is based on the fact that in general they would try to resolve the U.S. issues and crises, in this case the huge debt problem, through interaction with the opposite party. The Republicans, on the other hand, playing a big role in the military and energy sectors would rather deal with the U.S. problems and difficulties mostly through fabricating crises, creating high-pressure circumstances and resorting to force.
ID: How possible is it that the current deadlock would persist and turn into a very serious crisis?
Dr. MB: Capitalism has shown to have some sort of flexibility when it comes to dealing with these types of issues and problems. The Americans have been capable of resolving their predicaments in the past. So on the one hand, there is a possibility they will actually arrive at a solution over time and on the other hand no resolution might be achieved and the United States’ position may be degraded globally from an ideal one-polar system to a multi-polar one. The latter is more probable to occur.
ID: Earlier you mentioned the Republicans’ warmongering tendencies. Would this crisis cause the U.S. to soften up concerning its military approach?
Dr. MB: The Republicans involved the absolute maximum of their military force and facilities in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars during the Bush presidency. The Bush Administration lost the last presidential election due to the very fact of the economic burden these two wars imposed upon American society. Barack Obama, the Democratic candidate from the opposite party, took power. Now they are trying again to highlight Obama’s weaknesses in restraining the ongoing financial crisis. In spite of the fact that he was willing to adopt a different approach in handling the crisis, Obama has not been successful. He has not in fact fulfilled his campaign promises and slogans of change. Besides, the Republicans are still after their old warmongering policies in the Middle East. The ever-present disagreements and tension between the Democrats and the Republicans can easily be observed in their current dispute over Libya. Yet if the Republicans themselves were in power and involved in the NATO conflict in Libya, they would have conducted a more intensive military campaign, such as the one in Iraq.
However, because the persistent Democrats are still in power, Republicans have had no achievements so far over the Libya conflict. The Democrats believe that the Republicans’ political approach would only cause the United States more debt and further degradation in the nation’s global positioning.
ID: The dispute and conflict over the U.S. debt issue has put the country in danger of an economic crisis and it has almost reached a deadlock. Where do you think this crisis is rooted?
Dr. MB: In general terms, for the past 100 years there has always been disagreements between the Democrats and Republicans — the pigeons and the hawks — over domestic and foreign policies. However, such disagreements most often begin to surface at times when the U.S. becomes involved in a war. You can track it back to the World Wars I and II, Vietnam and recently the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. And the main cause of all this current conflict in the U.S is rooted and should be looked for somewhere in the Republicans’ warmongering attitude.
Two factors imposed a huge financial burden on the U.S. economy; one is the neoconservative policy to establish U.S. hegemony in the world through focusing on a new Middle East and the other is the U.S. military campaign in Afghanistan and Iraq. The main part of the U.S. Federal Reserve currency has been spent on these latest two wars. The Democrats and Republicans have always pointed the finger of blame at the other over this issue in their respective party’s political disputes. So this is the most important reason behind the financial crisis.
Another factor is that in the past few decades, American investors have moved away from a market of production, goods and services to being one of a broker-dealership. In other words, because of the heavy competition China and India have already begun in production throughout the world, investing inside and outside of the United States has neither the desired profitability nor the bright future it once had for the majority of investors. Hence investors have transferred their capital, finances and investments to the dealership market. The shift of markets is seen in the oil and energy fields as well as in other areas. This all has led to a political stock market game and created an economy of only commerce and dealership with no focus on production. This in effect resulted in a false, pseudo-rise of prices in areas such as oil, energy and goods, etc. Owing to this, investors have made big fortunes. Therefore, a false bubble economy came to the surface. Although there have been some winners in the gamble of the stock market, a great many more of the investors and financiers have lost the game. And the real estate market has been the one to suffer most by such a false bubble economy.
Consequently, the tremendous amount of debt imposed on the banking system caused by the huge military expenses of the wars resulted in a trillion-dollar deficit. And it has provoked tensions between the Democratic and Republican parties.
ID: How differently would the Democrats and the Republicans confront this issue?
Dr. MB: The Democrats’ system is based on the fact that in general they would try to resolve the U.S. issues and crises, in this case the huge debt problem, through interaction with the opposite party. The Republicans, on the other hand, playing a big role in the military and energy sectors would rather deal with the U.S. problems and difficulties mostly through fabricating crises, creating high-pressure circumstances and resorting to force.
ID: How possible is it that the current deadlock would persist and turn into a very serious crisis?
Dr. MB: Capitalism has shown to have some sort of flexibility when it comes to dealing with these types of issues and problems. The Americans have been capable of resolving their predicaments in the past. So on the one hand, there is a possibility they will actually arrive at a solution over time and on the other hand no resolution might be achieved and the United States’ position may be degraded globally from an ideal one-polar system to a multi-polar one. The latter is more probable to occur.
ID: Earlier you mentioned the Republicans’ warmongering tendencies. Would this crisis cause the U.S. to soften up concerning its military approach?
Dr. MB: The Republicans involved the absolute maximum of their military force and facilities in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars during the Bush presidency. The Bush Administration lost the last presidential election due to the very fact of the economic burden these two wars imposed upon American society. Barack Obama, the Democratic candidate from the opposite party, took power. Now they are trying again to highlight Obama’s weaknesses in restraining the ongoing financial crisis. In spite of the fact that he was willing to adopt a different approach in handling the crisis, Obama has not been successful. He has not in fact fulfilled his campaign promises and slogans of change. Besides, the Republicans are still after their old warmongering policies in the Middle East. The ever-present disagreements and tension between the Democrats and the Republicans can easily be observed in their current dispute over Libya. Yet if the Republicans themselves were in power and involved in the NATO conflict in Libya, they would have conducted a more intensive military campaign, such as the one in Iraq.
However, because the persistent Democrats are still in power, Republicans have had no achievements so far over the Libya conflict. The Democrats believe that the Republicans’ political approach would only cause the United States more debt and further degradation in the nation’s global positioning.
Previous article![]( "America's Economy: Downgraded")