Gideon Rachman, azi, în FT, despre evenimentele din nordul Africii şi din Orientul Mijlociu: "Este 1989, dar noi suntem ruşii": "For the western world, the “Arab spring” threatens to be a classic case of good news and bad news. The good news is that this is the Arab 1989. The bad news is that we are the Soviet Union.
An exaggeration? Certainly. But there is enough truth in the analogy to explain why both the US and the European Union are uneasy about revolutions that – on one level – promote core western values, such as democracy and individual rights.
Much of the corrupt and autocratic order that is wobbling so badly in the Middle East was western-backed. The sponsorship was nowhere near as brutal or as overt as the Soviet repression of eastern Europe. And there have always been anti-western regimes, such as Iran and Syria, existing alongside the pro-western governments in the Middle East...
Much of the corrupt and autocratic order that is wobbling so badly in the Middle East was western-backed. The sponsorship was nowhere near as brutal or as overt as the Soviet repression of eastern Europe. And there have always been anti-western regimes, such as Iran and Syria, existing alongside the pro-western governments in the Middle East...
Like the USSR in 1989, the US chose the honourable option in refusing to let its regional ally stay in power through force. But, like the Russians, the US now has to worry that it will sacrifice power in a traditional sphere of influence. American officials know that they risk losing friends and endangering economic and security interests in an emerging Middle East that they barely understand. After the fall of Mr Mubarak, a senior US official was heard to lament: “But we do everything with Egypt. Who do we work with now?”
The Europeans have a similar dilemma. The French and British eagerness to intervene in Libya reflected a desire to put themselves on the “right side of history” – and to bury an embarrassing record of co-operation with the old regimes in Tunisia and Libya. But backing the democratic uprisings in north Africa was a relatively easy call for the western powers, compared with the strategic and economic dilemmas thrown up in the Gulf, which is the most important oil-producing region in the world and a key base for al-Qaeda."
The Europeans have a similar dilemma. The French and British eagerness to intervene in Libya reflected a desire to put themselves on the “right side of history” – and to bury an embarrassing record of co-operation with the old regimes in Tunisia and Libya. But backing the democratic uprisings in north Africa was a relatively easy call for the western powers, compared with the strategic and economic dilemmas thrown up in the Gulf, which is the most important oil-producing region in the world and a key base for al-Qaeda."
Sunt în articol,(corectitudinea politică obligă!) şi câteva vise umede, de genul: "dăm jos guvernele din Iran şi Siria, ne punem oamenii noştri, evreii fac pace cu palestinienii(hă, hă, hă, poate numa'n...dar nici acolo!) şi-i lasă să-şi construiască un stat al lor, egiptenii devin o democraţie prosperă, toată lumea este fericită şi cu lacrimi pe obraz".
Doar că autorul îşi ia micile lui măsuri de precauţie: toate visele astea sunt ca o chintă royală în poker. Se poate să-ţi intre. Dar nu trebuie să te bazezi pe asta!
Important este altceva: când noi, ăştia, mai amărăşteni, scriam aşa ceva, şi nu de ieri, de azi, eram trataţi ca anti-americani, anti-occidentali, şi mai ştiu eu ce. Aştept să văd ce înjurături îşi ia Rachman de la băieţii verzi din minunata noastră patrie. Punem pariu că vor începe cu ceva de genul "jidan împuţit"?
Un comentariu:
Mi-a placut aia cu "e 1989-le lor si noi sintem rusii". Nu sint prea de acord cu "1989-le lor", dar n-as fio putut sa scot un mai mare adevar in a nutshell decit "noi sintem rusii"... Aferim.
Trimiteți un comentariu