In a
recent binational meeting in Mexico City, United States’ Secretary of Homeland
Security, Janet Napolitano, said that like they did with Osama Bin Laden last
year, her country special forces eventually would find Mexico’s ultimate narco, Joaquín “Chapo” Guzmán. “And you
know what happened to Osama Bin Laden”, she added. Her asseveration was a real
statement about our time's geopolitical trend. With the most prominent army in
the world, a worldwide spying net, directed by skilled agencies with long-life
experience in the matter, a cutting edge technology both in weaponry and in
information gathering and a pervasive set of financial, cultural and political
interests in the entire planet, America
is a die-hard empire. Since the beginning of the nineties, America has reached its most precious sci-fi
dreams in weaponry, as the Army showed worldwide in ‘91 Desert Storm against
Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.
Nowadays, there is a world of drones, photographer satellites and intelligent
rockets operated overseas working day and night on the America’s side.
SEALs in action |
In these
terms, the operation to bring down Osama Bin Laden was the perfect symbol of
the American present times. The entire strategy revealed clearer than ever the
new dimension of America’s
role in the flat, fast and furious postmodern world: the trend to become a
smooth but powerful global vigilante. Not because it had been history’s first
time that American special forces make an intervention like that (on the
contrary, its known that such practices are common in recent history of US
unipolar dominance), but because it settled a crucial turn in their global
leadership against the outlaws. We are perceiving a slight but unremitting
gliding from straight intervention to surgical extraction or even elimination
of the empire enemies. In the near future, major strikes could be done by the
use of robotics, and the extensive use of drones in Iraq points in that direction. Meanwhile,
key figures of terrorism, organized crime and violent radicals along the world
would be retired SEALs’ style. (SEALs, of course, was the unit on charge to
erase Bin Laden from the face of Earth.)
In his marvelous
report on the hunt and final death of Osama Bin Laden, “Getting Bin Laden”,
published in The New Yorker last
august, American journalist Nicholas Schmidle, tells in detail the key moments
of the military operation to kill public enemy number one. (The text is available at http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/08/08/110808fa_fact_schmidle.) Reading it we get
the intelligence to see the kind of efficiency that US Special Forces have in
order to survey, find and attack the enemy. There are the prominent results of
decades of military leadership in the planet. That is the product of the sum of
programs, methods, systems, human training and R&D in war technology to the
service of American justice.
CIA Headquarters |
For sure,
there’s a number of ethical problems in this kind of justice but for now it’s
the best we have in the world. Let’s be clear in this point: United States
is an empire and acts like that, period. In consequence, its actions must be
seen as the result of its national interests around the world. But at the same
time, there’s a righteous sense of pragmatic ethics that the rest of the world
(or, at least, the rest of the Western world) can no more than accept with
enthusiasm. It’s the realm of the so called community values or national values;
that is, the set of presuppositions that we have to assume as essential in
order to set up an ethic discourse against alternative ways of thought. American
philosopher Richard Rorty worked a lot in this path: in this side of the world,
there is no other way to establish right or wrong in national and international
affairs than thinking democracy, human rights and free speech as the essentials
of our ethical and political practice.
So, this
is the actual crossroad of American power: turn itself into a democratic
vigilante, no matter how paradoxical this may sound. Maybe that is a good way
to move forward its immense fire power and bureaucracy of war. For sure, it
would be a right strategy to face its financial decline by cutting the
overwhelming expends that traditional wars involve. But at the same time those
are good news for the rest of the world: we would have a very efficient crime
cleaner on our side.
2 comentarios:
No quisiera estar en los zapatos de gente que pudiera tentarse de decir que las fronteras y las leyes y las soberanías nacionales no les importan porque ellos están por encima de todo eso.
Además, los imperios nunca han terminado demasiado bien que digamos (la pax romana debió llamarse "pax alla romana", más propiamente !!!)
Como siempre, elegiste un tema candente y lo desarrollaste con mucha propiedad.
Va un abrazo, amigo.
Tienes razón. Quizá me faltó destacar que estas consideraciones son acerca de la política real. Es decir, hay dinámicas inevitables y debemos afrontar la realidad de las mismas. Si Estados Unidos, en tanto que imperio en decadencia (conserva un inmenso poderío militar y se haya en bancarrota) está ya ubicado en un mundo más allá de las soberanías nacionales, más nos vale tenerlo de nuestro lado. Creo que eso resume el punto de lo que he afirmado. Como siempre, muchas gracias por tus puntuales comentarios.
Saludotes.
Publicar un comentario