●   Bản rời    

VN không thể đặt hết các quả trứng trong cùng một giỏ

Subject: ***_Ai_đang_thống_trị_thế_giới_?_Who_rules_the_world?_
From: Mike Wilson
Date: Thu, May 12, 2016 2:06 pm

Tác giả bài tham luận này là Noam Chomsky, một chuyên gia ngữ học (kiêm triết gia, nhà khoa học nhận thức, nhà sử học, lý luận học, nhà phê bình xã hội, và nhà hoạt động chính trị - SH) tại đại học M.I.T. và là học giả chuyên về chính sách đối ngoại của Mỹ
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky

Thật khó có thể nói rằng Mỹ đang cai trị toàn cầu trong khi nó đang bị thách đố cùng lúc tại 3 mặt trận :

1. TQ đang thách đố Mỹ tại Biển Đông và Tây Thái Bình Dương
2. Nga đang thách đố Mỹ tại Ukraine và Syria
3. Al Qaeda và ISIS đang thách đố Mỹ tại Trung Đông

Liệu Mỹ có thể đánh cùng lúc 3 mặt trận và toàn thắng cả 3, để giữ ngôi bá chủ thế giới ?!

VN cần phải thức thời trên bàn cờ chiến lược toàn cầu.
VN không thể đặt cược toàn bộ sinh mệnh dân tộc vào tay Mỹ, hay Nga, hay TQ !!!

VN không thể đặt hết các quả trứng trong cùng một giỏ !!!

nth-fl

_______________________________

Who rules the world? America is no longer the obvious answer


Challenged from all sides, the US is losing its tight grip on international power, Noam Chomsky writes, as world public opinion becomes a "second superpower"

Noam Chomsky.
The challenges today: east Asia

Beginning with the “American lake”, some eyebrows might be raised over the report in mid-December 2015 that “an American B-52 bomber on a routine mission over the South China Sea unintentionally flew within two nautical miles of an artificial island built by China, senior defense officials said, exacerbating a hotly divisive issue for Washington and Beijing”.

Those familiar with the grim record of the 70 years of the nuclear weapons era will be all too aware that this is the kind of incident that has often come perilously close to igniting terminal nuclear war. One need not be a supporter of China’s provocative and aggressive actions in the South China Sea to notice that the incident did not involve a Chinese nuclear-capable bomber in the Caribbean, or off the coast of California, where China has no pretensions of establishing a “Chinese lake”. Luckily for the world.

Chinese leaders understand very well that their country’s maritime trade routes are ringed with hostile powers from Japan through the Malacca Straits and beyond, backed by overwhelming US military force. Accordingly, China is proceeding to expand westward with extensive investments and careful moves toward integration.

In part, these developments are within the framework of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which includes the central Asian states and Russia, and soon India and Pakistan with Iran as one of the observers – a status that was denied to the US, which was also called on to close all military bases in the region. China is constructing a modernized version of the old silk roads, with the intent not only of integrating the region under Chinese influence, but also of reaching Europe and the Middle Eastern oil-producing regions. It is pouring huge sums into creating an integrated Asian energy and commercial system, with extensive high-speed rail lines and pipelines.

One element of the program is a highway through some of the world’s tallest mountains to the new Chinese-developed port of Gwadar in Pakistan, which will protect oil shipments from potential US interference.

The program may also, China and Pakistan hope, spur industrial development in Pakistan, which the United States has not undertaken despite massive military aid, and might also provide an incentive for Pakistan to clamp down on domestic terrorism, a serious issue for China in western Xinjiang province. Gwadar will be part of China’s “string of pearls”, bases being constructed in the Indian Ocean for commercial purposes but potentially also for military use, with the expectation that China might someday be able to project power as far as the Persian Gulf for the first time in the modern era.
All of these moves remain immune to Washington’s overwhelming military power, short of annihilation by nuclear war, which would destroy the US as well.

In 2015, China also established the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), with itself as the main shareholder. Fifty-six nations participated in the opening in Beijing in June, including US allies Australia, Britain and others which joined in defiance of Washington’s wishes. The US and Japan were absent.
Some analysts believe that the new bank might turn out to be a competitor to the Bretton Woods institutions (the IMF and the World Bank), in which the United States holds veto power. There are also some expectations that the SCO might eventually become a counterpart to Nato.
The challenges today: eastern Europe

Turning to the second region, eastern Europe, there is a crisis brewing at the Nato-Russian border. It is no small matter.

In his illuminating and judicious scholarly study of the region, Frontline Ukraine: Crisis in the Borderlands, Richard Sakwa writes – all too plausibly – that the “Russo-Georgian war of August 2008 was in effect the first of the "wars to stop Nato enlargement"; the Ukraine crisis of 2014 is the second. It is not clear whether humanity would survive a third.”

The west sees Nato enlargement as benign. Not surprisingly, Russia, along with much of the Global South, has a different opinion, as do some prominent western voices. George Kennan warned early on that Nato enlargement is a “tragic mistake”, and he was joined by senior American statesmen in an open letter to the White House describing it as a “policy error of historic proportions”.

The present crisis has its origins in 1991, with the end of the cold war and the collapse of the Soviet Union. There were then two contrasting visions of a new security system and political economy in Eurasia. In Sakwa’s words, one vision was of a “Wider Europe", with the EU at its heart but increasingly coterminous with the Euro-Atlantic security and political community; and on the other side there [was] the idea of "Greater Europe", a vision of a continental Europe, stretching from Lisbon to Vladivostok, that has multiple centers, including Brussels, Moscow and Ankara, but with a common purpose in overcoming the divisions that have traditionally plagued the continent”.

Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev was the major proponent of Greater Europe, a concept that also had European roots in Gaullism and other initiatives. However, as Russia collapsed under the devastating market reforms of the 1990s, the vision faded, only to be renewed as Russia began to recover and seek a place on the world stage under Vladimir Putin who, along with his associate Dmitry Medvedev, has repeatedly “called for the geopolitical unification of all of "Greater Europe" from Lisbon to Vladivostok, to create a genuine "strategic partnership"”.

These initiatives were “greeted with polite contempt (and fear of Russia's preeminence in Europe. nth-fl) ”, Sakwa writes, regarded as “little more than a cover for the establishment of a "Greater Russia" by stealth” and an effort to “drive a wedge” between North America and western Europe. Such concerns trace back to earlier cold war fears that Europe might become a “third force” independent of both the great and minor superpowers and moving toward closer links to the latter (as can be seen in Willy Brandt’s Ostpolitik and other initiatives).

The western response to Russia’s collapse was triumphalist. It was hailed as signaling “the end of history”, the final victory of western capitalist democracy, almost as if Russia were being instructed to revert to its pre-world war I status as a virtual economic colony of the west (no way !!! nth-fl).

Nato enlargement began at once, in violation of verbal assurances to Gorbachev that Nato forces would not move “one inch to the east” after he agreed that a unified Germany could become a Nato member – a remarkable concession, in the light of history. That discussion kept to East Germany. The possibility that Nato might expand beyond Germany was not discussed with Gorbachev, even if privately considered.

Soon, Nato did begin to move beyond, right to the borders of Russia. The general mission of Nato was officially changed to a mandate to protect “crucial infrastructure” of the global energy system, sea lanes and pipelines, giving it a global area of operations. Furthermore, under a crucial western revision of the now widely heralded doctrine of “responsibility to protect”, sharply different from the official UN version, Nato may now also serve as an intervention force under US command.

Of particular concern to Russia are plans to expand Nato to Ukraine. These plans were articulated explicitly at the Bucharest Nato summit of April 2008, when Georgia and Ukraine were promised eventual membership in Nato. The wording was unambiguous: “Nato welcomes Ukraine’s and Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations for membership in Nato. We agreed today that these countries will become members of Nato.”
With the “Orange Revolution” victory of pro-western candidates in Ukraine in 2004, State Department representative Daniel Fried rushed there and “emphasized US support for Ukraine’s Nato and Euro-Atlantic aspirations”, as a WikiLeaks report revealed.

Russia’s concerns are easily understandable. They are outlined by international relations scholar John Mearsheimer in the leading US establishment journal, Foreign Affairs. He writes that “the taproot of the current crisis [over Ukraine] is Nato expansion and Washington’s commitment to move Ukraine out of Moscow’s orbit and integrate it into the west”, which Putin viewed as “a direct threat to Russia’s core interests”.
“Who can blame him?” Mearsheimer asks, pointing out that “Washington may not like Moscow’s position, but it should understand the logic behind it”. That should not be too difficult. After all, as everyone knows, “The United States does not tolerate distant great powers deploying military forces anywhere in the western hemisphere, much less on its borders.”

In fact, the US stand is far stronger. It does not tolerate what is officially called “successful defiance” of the Monroe Doctrine of 1823, which declared (but could not yet implement) US control of the hemisphere. And a small country that carries out such successful defiance may be subjected to “the terrors of the earth” and a crushing embargo – as happened to Cuba.

We need not ask how the United States would have reacted had the countries of Latin America joined the Warsaw Pact, with plans for Mexico and Canada to join as well. The merest hint of the first tentative steps in that direction would have been “terminated with extreme prejudice”, to adopt CIA lingo.

As in the case of China, one does not have to regard Putin’s moves and motives favorably to understand the logic behind them, nor to grasp the importance of understanding that logic instead of issuing imprecations against it. As in the case of China, a great deal is at stake, reaching as far – literally – as questions of survival.
The challenges today: the Islamic world

Let us turn to the third region of major concern, the (largely) Islamic world, also the scene of the global war on terror (GWOT) that George W Bush declared in 2001 after the 9/11 terrorist attack. To be more accurate, re-declared.
The GWOT was declared by the Reagan administration when it took office, with fevered rhetoric about a “plague spread by depraved opponents of civilization itself” (as Reagan put it) and a “return to barbarism in the modern age” (the words of George Shultz, his secretary of state).
The original GWOT has been quietly removed from history. It very quickly turned into a murderous and destructive terrorist war afflicting Central America, southern Africa, and the Middle East, with grim repercussions to the present, even leading to condemnation of the United States by the World Court (which Washington dismissed). In any event, it is not the right story for history, so it is gone.

The success of the Bush-Obama version of GWOT can readily be evaluated on direct inspection. When the war was declared, the terrorist targets were confined to a small corner of tribal Afghanistan. They were protected by Afghans, who mostly disliked or despised them, under the tribal code of hospitality – which baffled Americans when poor peasants refused “to turn over Osama bin Laden for the, to them, astronomical sum of $25m”.

There are good reasons to believe that a well-constructed police action, or even serious diplomatic negotiations with the Taliban, might have placed those suspected of the 9/11 crimes in American hands for trial and sentencing. But such options were off the table. Instead, the reflexive choice was large-scale violence – not with the goal of overthrowing the Taliban (that came later) but to make clear US contempt for tentative Taliban offers of the possible extradition of bin Laden.

How serious these offers were we do not know, since the possibility of exploring them was never entertained. Or perhaps the US was just intent on “trying to show its muscle, score a victory and scare everyone in the world. They don’t care about the suffering of the Afghans or how many people we will lose”.

That was the judgment of the highly respected anti-Taliban leader Abdul Haq, one of the many oppositionists who condemned the American bombing campaign launched in October 2001 as “a big setback” for their efforts to overthrow the Taliban from within, a goal they considered within their reach.
His judgment is confirmed by Richard A Clarke, who was chairman of the Counterterrorism Security Group at the White House under President George W Bush when the plans to attack Afghanistan were made. As Clarke describes the meeting, when informed that the attack would violate international law, “the president yelled in the narrow conference room, ‘I don’t care what the international lawyers say, we are going to kick some ass.’” The attack was also bitterly opposed by the major aid organizations working in Afghanistan, who warned that millions were on the verge of starvation and that the consequences might be horrendous.
The consequences for poor Afghanistan years later need hardly be reviewed.

The next target of the sledgehammer was Iraq.
The US-UK invasion, utterly without credible pretext, is the major crime of the 21st century. The invasion led to the death of hundreds of thousands of people in a country where the civilian society had already been devastated by American and British sanctions that were regarded as “genocidal” by the two distinguished international diplomats who administered them, and resigned in protest for this reason. The invasion also generated millions of refugees, largely destroyed the country, and instigated a sectarian conflict that is now tearing apart Iraq and the entire (Mid-East) region. It is an astonishing fact about our intellectual and moral culture that in informed and enlightened circles it can be called, blandly, “the liberation of Iraq”. (Operation Iraq Liberation , or O.I.L., in abbreviation ! nth-fl)

Pentagon and British Ministry of Defense polls found that only 3% of Iraqis regarded the US security role in their neighborhood as legitimate, less than 1% believed that “coalition” (US-UK) forces were good for their security, 80% opposed the presence of coalition forces in the country, and a majority supported attacks on coalition troops. Afghanistan has been destroyed beyond the possibility of reliable polling, but there are indications that something similar may be true there as well. Particularly in Iraq the United States suffered a severe defeat, abandoning its official war aims, and leaving the country under the influence of the sole victor, Iran (the Shiite branch of Islam).

The sledgehammer was also wielded elsewhere, notably in Libya, where the three traditional imperial powers (Britain, France and the US) procured security council resolution 1973 and instantly violated it, becoming the air force of the rebels.(this set up the stage for Russia's involvement in Syria - to prevent the US and NATO from repeating the same farce there ! nth-fl)

The effect (in Lybia) was to undercut the possibility of a peaceful, negotiated settlement; sharply increase casualties (by at least a factor of 10, according to political scientist Alan Kuperman); leave Libya in ruins, in the hands of warring militias; and, more recently, to provide the Islamic State with a base that it can use to spread terror beyond.

Quite sensible diplomatic proposals by the African Union, accepted in principle by Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi, were ignored by the imperial triumvirate (Britain, France and the US), as Africa specialist Alex de Waal reviews. A huge flow of weapons and jihadis has spread terror and violence from west Africa (now the champion for terrorist murders) to the Levant, while the Nato attack also sent a flood of refugees from Africa to Europe.
Yet another triumph of “humanitarian intervention”, and, as the long and often ghastly record reveals, not an unusual one, going back to its modern origins four centuries ago.

(the current crisis in the Middle East was first created by the U.S. and the European powers, by artificially creating the Zionist state of Israel in the midst of Arab land ... years later, the uneven-handed policy of favoring Zionist expansion over Palestinian territory has created the political impasse, wars and human tragedy overflowing to epic proportions with refugees pouring into Europe from the land of conflicts ... it is all man-made, American-made, Euro-made ... even Al Qaeda and ISIS are the products of American and European miscalculations . nth-fl)

This piece was first published on TomDispatch.com. This is part one of an overview essay from Noam Chomsky’s new book on American power and the world, Who Rules the World?





Đó đây


2018-01-20 - Hạnh phúc khi được đồng hành cùng Chủ Nhật Đỏ - Theo Nam Cường, làm từ thiện phụ thuộc vào tâm của mỗi người, nếu cứ làm từ thiện rồi đi khoe thì có khi chỉ là lợi dụng từ thiện để PR, để đánh bóng tên tuổi mà thôi

2018-01-20 - Hình trên Facebook lộ vật chứng sát nhân giúp tố cáo thủ phạm - Cô Cheyenne Rose Antoine 21 tuổi, người Canada vừa bị kết tội giết bạn mình, Brittney Gargol (lúc đó 18 tuổi, hồi Tháng Ba, 2015) sau khi cảnh sát tìm ra hung khí giết người từ Facebook.

2018-01-20 - Vinfast ký hợp đồng sản xuất xe mẫu với nhà thiết kế Ý, hợp tác cùng BMW - Chiếc xe với đặc điểm “Bản sắc Việt - Thiết kế Ý - Kỹ thuật Đức - Tiêu chuẩn quốc tế” sẽ được trưng bày tại Triển lãm ô tô Paris Motorshow tổ chức tại Pháp vào tháng 10/2018

2018-01-19 - NutiFood tấn công thị trường sữa "cực kỳ khó tính" Hoa Kỳ - Sau nhiều năm chuẩn bị, NutiFood sáng nay vừa ký với Công ty Delori (Mỹ) đã ký kết hợp đồng xuất khẩu sản phẩm sữa bột pha sẵn dành cho trẻ em biếng ăn Pedia Plus sang thị trường Hoa Kỳ.

2018-01-18 - Phỏng Vấn TT Nguyễn Thanh Tuấn: Không Phải Chủ Trương Của Đảng-Họ Tự Ý Thay -

2018-01-17 - Giáo hoàng bị ném khăn trúng ngay mặt tại Chile - nhiều người CG địa phương tức giận trước việc GH đã bổ nhiệm GM Juan Barros, người bị cáo buộc bảo vệ LM Fernando Karadima, người đã lạm dụng nhiều bé trai ở tuổi thiếu niên suốt nhiều năm

2018-01-17 - Cô gái ở New York bị 23 năm tù vì đầu độc mẹ của bồ cũ - Cô Kaitlyn Conley 24 tuổi ở tiểu bang New York vừa bị tuyên án 23 năm tù do đầu độc bà Mary Yoder, sếp cũ của mình, cũng là mẹ của người bồ cũ. Ông William Yoder cáo buộc rằng “Conley cãi cọ với con trai tôi… rồi sau đó giết mẹ của nó.” Ông kể lại, những ngày cuối của bà vợ, thường xuyên nôn mửa, tiêu chảy và chịu đủ mọi đau đớn khác

2018-01-16 - 1:02:59 (DOÃN NHƯ LÂN 01) SỬA SỬ KHÔNG ĐƠN GIẢN CHỈ LÀ SỬA -



▪ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 >>>




Thư, ý kiến ngắn
● 2018-01-15 - Độc kế mới: TỜ CHỨNG (AFFIDAVIT) tự thề thốt rằng mình không có tội!!! - Trạng Móc -

● 2018-01-13 - Với phong trào "tố Cộng", Diệm đã cho gia nô giết "những người kháng chiến cũ" - Trần Quang Diệu -

● 2018-01-12 - Trrước đó chưa có một triều đại nào của nước Việt Nam dám đụng đám Chệt Hoa kiều - Phượng Hoàng GV -

● 2018-01-12 - Tiếp tục phủ nhận sự kiện tự thiêu của HT TQD: bào chữa cho chế độ Ngô Đình Diệm - Thanh Duy vs Trung Kiên -

● 2018-01-11 - Ông có bước ra khỏi nhà chăng, để thấy rằng nước Mỹ đang tràn ngập hàng hóa của Tàu - Huy Thái vs Diễn Đàn -

● 2018-01-10 - Những xảo biện trong cách viết của ông Bằng Phong Đặng Văn Âu - Thanh Duy -

● 2018-01-10 - Lưu ý ông Bằng Phong Đặng Văn Âu đừng có gian xảo - Đọc những bài sau đây của rồi hãy phát ngôn - Trần Quang Diệu -

● 2018-01-10 - “SAINT-MAKING FACTORY” - XƯỞNG SẢN XUẤT THÁNH - Ri Nguyễn -

● 2018-01-10 - Sự khác nhau giữa các tu sĩ Phật Giáo và các tu sĩ TCG - Mike Wilson -

● 2018-01-09 - Thư mời tham dự triễn lãm SOLO UPSIDEDOWNISM 2018 tại SEATTLE. - Họa sĩ Đại Giang -

● 2018-01-08 - Sài Gòn đây sao? Tôi xa tổ quốc từ năm 19 tuổi nhưng Việt Nam ở trong tôi cho đến cuối đời - Quán Tâm Cư Sĩ -

● 2018-01-07 - Hải ngoại: "Điện Biên Phủ Trên Không" - thua đau, chiên chữa thẹn, hoang tưởng và tự sướng - Trạng Móc -

● 2018-01-07 - Cô gái Việt Nam này có thể làm điều bất ngờ trên sân chơi Hoa Hậu quốc tế - Việt Dân -

● 2018-01-06 - Cuốn sách Fire and Fury (Lửa Cuồng Nộ) của nhà báo Michael Wolff - Mike Wilson giới thiệu -

● 2018-01-06 - Vụ án mạng vì cuồng tín làm tôi nhớ chuyện thật trong họ nhà tôi - Trần Quang DIệu -

● 2018-01-05 - Vì đâu nên nỗi - Chiên là thế - Chúng nó cuồng tín và hung dữ lắm - Trần Quang Diệu + Diến Đàn -

● 2018-01-04 - LM Rhodes đến ĐẤT TA với 1 sứ mệnh là truyền giáo, không phải để giúp DÂN TA thăng tiến. - N Q Nguyen -

● 2018-01-03 - Steve Bannon nói: con trai Trump, con rể và quản lý tranh cử đều phạm tội phản quốc - Mike Wilson -

● 2018-01-02 - Vụ Chữ Việt, nghiên cứu của GS Bùi Hiền: Ý kiến trước những kiểu bàn tán, đồn thổi đủ điều... - Huy Thái và Dến Đàn -

● 2018-01-01 - Sài gòn vui suốt đêm thâu. Thời tôi đi học (trước 1975) có đâu như vầy ! - Quán Tâm cư sĩ -

● 2017-12-29 - Chúa qúa tệ, chẳng làm được trò trống gi - Ri Nguyễn -

● 2017-12-25 - Năm tới, 2018, tiền mua Bảo Hiểm Y Tế của tôi tăng 500 đô la - Mike Wilson -

● 2017-12-24 - Hỏa hoạn là do ... tại VC? Việt Nam có bao nhiêu hang đá bằng giấy được dựng lên? - Huy Thái vs Diễn Đàn -

● 2017-12-24 - Thiên Chúa: Thánh Vương hay Ma Vương? - Ri Nguyễn -

● 2017-12-23 - Hiểm họa của thế giới: Cá nuôi – Farmed fish - Huy Thái -

● 2017-12-23 - Giê Su có thực hay không - không phải là mấu chốt của vấn đề - Mike Wilson -

● 2017-12-19 - Còn Nhớ Hồi Quí Vị Mới Sang Mỹ Hay Không? - Mike Wilson -

● 2017-12-18 - Có mấy câu hỏi được nêu ra, tưởng chừng như ngụy biện được cho việc theo giặc - Mike Wilson -


▪ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 >>>