Why do "they" hate us?

Why do 'they' hate us?

If Bush's intent was to make as many enemies as possible,
By Hannah Naiditch


BEFORE THE FALL:
President Jimmy Carter and Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi
at the White House.

In the past, Americans were respected and even admired in most of the world. Our foreign policy was usually bipartisan and rarely an issue of debate during election time. Our interventions were low-key, often secretive, and diplomacy was still a part of our foreign policy.

Most nations expressed sympathy for America after 9/11 -- but since then, these feelings of sympathy have been transformed into resentment, even hate.

George W. Bush introduced a new foreign policy characterized by insulting and humiliating other leaders. It was a provocative, in-your-face type of foreign policy showing a total inability to be diplomatic.

Our president went through the motions of listening and consulting with others, but made it clear ahead of time that if necessary we would 'go it alone.' Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice traveled the world threatening and preaching to other nations that their behavior was 'not helpful.' It never occurred to this president that other nations might have their own national interests in mind. 'You are either with us or you are with the terrorists,' he insisted.

He publicly proclaimed that he reserved the right to carry out preemptive strikes and he did not rule out the use of torture. If his intent was to make as many enemies as possible, he could not have done better.

Bush tells us we are 'a caring nation that prays to the almighty God ... we are a nation that is generous.' But the macho side of Bush takes over: 'Freedom is under attack,' he warns. We will export death and destruction all across the world in defense of our great nation. 'America will not run in the face of car bombers and assassins as long as I am commander in chief.' And 'We can't be isolationists because it prevents us from our duty around the world.'

Are these echoes of the colonialist days of 'manifest destiny' and the 'white man's burden?'

Dr. Robert M. Bowman, a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel, suggests that 'We are not hated because we practice democracy, freedom and human rights.

We are hated because we deny these things to people in Third World countries whose resources are coveted by our multinational corporations.'

Much of the world looks at us as a rogue nation. We bomb at will, kill thousands of innocent civilians, but we are always the good guys with God on our side, while 'they,' whoever they may be, are evil.

We are seen as self-righteous, arrogant, hypocritical and belligerent.

We respond to terrorism with more terrorism and we bomb nations that have never attacked us. With each belligerent act, we create more people who hate us.

When Bush decided that Saddam Hussein was a bad guy and that he was a threat to his neighbors, the Arab League stood united in opposing our attack on Iraq. They warned us that we would be opening the gates of hell. Now the whole Middle East is in flames.

The Iraqi government was mostly picked by us, and their flag and their textbooks were changed by us. The presence of American troops on sacred soil fuels this war.

Henry Kissinger, referring to democratically elected Salvador Allende in Chile, said 'I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people.' It was a stunningly arrogant comment but, sadly, it continues to reflect what has guided our foreign policy. Democratically elected leaders require our approval -- that's our 'democracy' for the rest of the world.

In contrast to Kissinger's comment, Thomas Jefferson pointed out that 'We surely cannot deny to any nation the right whereon our own government is founded, that every nation may govern itself according to whatever form it pleases.'

If America had avoided the temptation of empire and had chosen Jefferson's guide for our foreign policy, we would have inherited a much more peaceful world. Instead, our country has embarked on an unending series of military adventures.

To mention just some of the more recent ones: In Iran, democratically elected socialist Mossadegh nationalized the oil companies. In 1953 he was overthrown by the CIA and replaced with the Shah.

In 1960 our CIA orchestrated the overthrow of democratically elected Lumumba in Congo and replaced him with the corrupt tyrant Mobutu.

In 1973 we overthrew democratically elected socialist Allende in Chile and replaced him with the bloody dictator General Augusto Pinochet. And the list goes on.

Since World War II we have militarily intervened in Korea (1950), Iran (1953), Guatemala (1954), the Congo (1960), Cuba (1961), Vietnam (1961-1973), the Dominican Republic (1965), Chile (1973), Grenada (1983), Lebanon (1958 and 1983), Libya (1986), Panama (1989), Somalia (1991), and Haiti (1994).

These interventions were carried out under Democratic and Republican leadership.

Anti-communism became our national ideology. Containing communism or democratic socialism or anything on the left was equated with fighting for freedom and democracy. US support for 'friendly' rightists to keep them in power has not served us well, and no empire lasts forever.

Bush escalated our mostly covert and diplomatic foreign policy to a historically unprecedented confrontational level, and it has given millions a reason to hate us more than they already do..

source