About the West & Its Politics

Every time the world witnesses a momentous event taking place, the leaders of the West announce that they are either surprised or caught off guard by what is happening. They blame their intelligence [agencies] of knowing such an event is occurring and not reacting, or deny ever knowing about it. In both cases, Western governments pass through phases of “confusion” and then respond from a perspective that shows clear knowledge of the situation taking place. They turn it into a coherent plan where politicians who know how to achieve their goals use the event to further their political agendas.

This is what often happens when major international developments occur, from the Russian Revolution of 1917, to the Iranian Revolution of 1978, to the latest and ongoing events in the Arab world. Of all the wars and massacres that have occurred around the world, perhaps the most well-known and tragic in modern times were the massacres in Rwanda where nearly a million fell prey to genocide in less than a year. When the mass murder became public, Western intelligence, embassies, military, envoys and civilians all claimed that they were not aware of the massacres taking place. They stated that they had not imagined that such an atrocity could possibly happen, even though their envoys and military were stationed in Rwanda and the surrounding region.

Those witnessing the events happening today will find that the West will not recognize nor respect the facts, and will actively pursue policies which revolve around an ignorance of our reality. In dealing with the Arabs over the past 20 years, the West has stuck with old foreign policies in dealing with Middle Eastern developments rather than focusing on the reality and the lives of Arabs today. This is why we see the Western media’s astonishment at the reality and the developments occurring in the Arab world. The Western media is unaware of the amount of control their governments exert over it, only catering to the needs of U.S. leadership. Western media expresses itself according to fluctuating U.S. foreign policy and views about the events, regardless of the impact of the events on U.S. strategy and interests in the region.

From the calls for the departure of Hosni Mubarak, to the call for a supervised transition period, we can see the West’s diverse reactions to developments in the Middle East. They range from commending the military and its involvement, to the rising fear about what caused these events and their effects on the interests of the United States and its ally, “Israel.” The West’s reaction is a chain of contradictions where the observer is surprised to see what takes place in a country that declares itself the ideal leader and the leading example to the world. It is clear that the United States is ignorant about nearly everything about the world.

The West does not have any justification for its lack of understanding of the situations in the Middle East and the politics of the world. From the failure of its own intelligence to inform it about these situations, to the failure of the politicians in the region to see these events coming, the U.S. does not have a real understanding of current conflicts. The United States blames Middle Eastern politicians for the failure of U.S. foreign policy. The failure of the policy to control or predict the events results in the removal of politicians who have stood by Western countries’ foreign policy in the past. Strangely, every important event taking place in the world turns quickly into a situation of interest to the U.S., which wants to manage and be the dominant hand in international affairs. It continues its constant interference in other countries’ decision making.

The public appearance of the president of the United States, secretary of state, secretary of defense and its House of Representatives is expected with the occurrence of any important political event around the world. If you follow what they do and say it will cause you confusion. This is not only because of the contradictions and their fluctuating attitudes, but because their foreign policy is created by people from different backgrounds with very different views. This helps to explain how its foreign policy is perceived, which the United States uses for its own good. We see a mix of internal and external factors at work, both domestic and international. Explanations about what has caused the events are all intermingled together by competing voices of political parties and political strategists, both domestically and abroad.

No one understands what is really happening or what the real and latest position of the United States is. Is it what the president expresses, or is it what members of his Cabinet say, or is it what Congress declares? Is there any bigger contradiction within a county’s politics: that the U.S. Congress can enact a law which will force Hosni Mubarak to leave his presidency in Egypt, while Obama, at the same time, calls for a supervised transition of Mubarak’s authority to a different one? The State Department is calling for democracy and commends Mubarak for his past cooperation with Washington throughout his 30-year rule. What are the real attitudes of the United States?

I believe that these contradictions are a plan to leave the door wide open for other outcomes and other possibilities. At the same time, it is a way to deter any clear and final position on the events which shows that the United States clearly has an intentional attitude of ambiguity. This is driven by Western ignorance of our reality and their fears of unknown outcomes and their ability to reshape and change their foreign policy in the region. Any changes may lead to an undesirable result or dangerous outcome for the United States, especially if the event’s developments are unexpected or likely to go in a direction that does not align with Washington’s interests. This is exactly what is happening with the latest developments in the Middle East, where the United States is again in an unclear position.

There is no need for lengthy discussion of European politics or its contradictions and hypocrisy. On one hand, they do not comprehend our reality, and on the other, they are helpless and unable to do anything useful when such developments do take place. Not knowing what they want, Western governments will sometimes side with the leading powers in Middle Eastern countries, while claiming to hold views and values of democracy that contradict the reality of the American foreign policy practices. Today, Western governments are keeping an eye on other nations and betting on their instability while lending a hand to leaders and governments that are unfavorable to the West’s own interests in the region.

Western governments hang their hopes on the economy, using it as leverage in their policies. The day will soon come when we will see a move from its economic policy to an alternative one. At the same time, Western governments tend to fear any change in public opinion about their policies and practices. This is especially true of Europe’s drive to serve other nations and the discussion of Western governments’ ability to do so, even though Western governance has given birth to a broken system of social and individual freedoms. Can we forgive Europe’s position of stupidity, lies and their nonsense blabber? Its own countries do not share similar views or interests, even with the existence of the European Union, the Euro currency and the vast knowledge and scientific capabilities the West holds.

As the official leader of the world, the United States recognizes that its own devices and intelligence do not comprehend reality beyond its borders, yet it still holds views and values of democracy that contradict its foreign policies, practices and influence of power in the Middle East. They do not expect any changes in the region or any developments to occur around the world. The United States does not present or hold a correct view or any valid information about other societies, individuals, events or the probabilities of an event taking place in the future. The West’s own foreign policy in regard to the Arab world contradicts its own proclaimed values without exception. America’s foreign policy is lacking an alternative view and world understanding, which if addressed would provide the United States a flexible way to deal with developments around the world.

It is imperative to ask the question, what gives the United States the right to lead and the rest of the world to follow? It delivers its part of leadership without any opposition regarding options or processes. The outcome of these policies always turns into a tragedy for the other nations who follow their lead.

The same question was asked in the years 1990-1991. Former U.S. President George Bush Sr. addressed the idea of the United States as the leader of the world with the declaration that only the United States can hold the world together and keep it safe. There are two reasons why this is not possible. I mentioned the first reason earlier. However, the second reason is the limited grasp the United States has on the whole world and its problems. To understand a country’s issues, manage it in an appropriate way and on higher levels of complexity in regard to any development, there needs to be a better understanding of the world as a whole. The politics of the United States are evolving into a chain of scandals, one after the other, which can be seen in its media that presents a particular view about the country’s path and its policies. The United States media is almost demanding the federal government and Congress avoid making any decision or position on international cases in order to lower the increasing numbers of scandals happening on its political stage and to its politicians (which is very apparent to us all).

There is nothing the Unites States can do other than to abstain from interfering in the world’s affairs and from forcing its own views on others. When it does interfere and impose its values, it only makes things worse and more complicated. There is one position everyone wishes the United States would take, which is to not have a view or position on our Arab reality and events. The United States only cares about its own interests when it comes to its foreign policy and practices in the Middle East. This foreign policy is in contradiction to their real interests and the gains they could achieve in the region if the policy were changed or revised.

The Unites States has no purpose but to cause us more complications. Making it seem like our issues can only be resolved with the interference of its foreign policy is causing us more harm than good.

Gentlemen of Washington and the rest of the West, leave us alone! Stay away from us and let us manage our own issues in our own way, a way you do not comprehend or recognize. If you really want our friendship, you should leave us alone. Do not drag us into mazes of confusion the same way you have done on the issues of Palestine and other countries in the region.