RESEARCH
PAPER SAMPLE
U.S.
Foreign Policy
This
is a fragment of a research paper written by our writer
discussing how Europeans and Middle East Newspapers
see the current U.S. foreign policy. Its a research
of the various newspaper stances on the issue.
It
has been a year since the devastating attacks took place
on September 11th in United States, which shook the
American society to the core and brought about far reaching
changes to the U.S. policies both home and abroad. The
attacks exposed Americans to threats and challenges
never faced before and proved that even the most powerful
country in the world is not immune to such threats.
In addition astronomical defense budgets and expensive
security measures are insufficient to buy peace and
security for the American People. More than anything
else the attacks indicated to American government how
small the world has become and how vital it is for a
superpower like America to cooperate and acquire support
in order to guarantee the security for its people and
to eliminate terrorism. The events of September 11 made
the government realize that to combat terrorism, instead
of resorting to unilateral and oppressive measures,
it has to muster the resources of entire world community
to extirpate the root causes of terrorism. Thus right
after the attacks U.S. embarked on the systematic crackdown
of terrorism realizing that it has to win the support
and cooperation of the world community. The U.S. 'War
on Terrorism' was not only supported with great zeal
and enthusiasm around the world but many nation states
offered military and monetary support. Yet, during the
war in Afghanistan and U.S aim to expand the scope of
war to other countries like Iraq has led many countries
to strongly oppose the US.
I
will take two perspectives to the U.S. foreign policy,
the European perspective and the Middle East perspective.
A newspaper study will be done to show how these regions
view the current U.S. policy what the similarities are
and a statement of their mutual worries. The European
perspective is mainly taken from the point of view of
two countries the United Kingdom and Germany while the
Middle East perspective includes views of authors and
columnists from Iran, Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates.
As
soon as the United States embarked on a military campaign
in Afghanistan and after the Taliban retreat, there
were doubts emerging from all parts of the world about
the said campaign. Despite a war in Afghanistan that
has dropped thousands of bombs and killed unknown numbers
of civilians there were no devastating anti-Americans
riots, except in Pakistan. The Americans and its European
allies reassured the world that the campaign would be
quick and short. But after 10 months of campaign the
main figure behind the attacks- Osama bin Laden and
Mullah Omar -did get caught and Taliban had already
retreated in the mountains. Though many Taliban and
Al-Quaeda terrorists were caught, there were a lot of
doubts raised by politicians, intellectuals and journalist
about America's war on terrorism. While domestically
the government had huge support on its war against terrorism
and there was no strong consensus among the government,
politicians, intellectuals and general public. The war
on Afghanistan made many nations particularly Arab nations
severely criticize American policies.
In
the Egyptian newspaper Al Gomhuria, Samir Ragab, who
is said to be close to President Hosni Mubarak, asked:
"Where are the Americans now? We all thought they
were superhuman, equipped with invincible power, wealth
and the ability to manipulate." Because Americans
bomb while being unable to catch Mr. bin Laden, he said,
"innocent civilians in Afghanistan who complain
that they have not tasted beef for three years are suffering
most of the casualties." A Turkish editor and a
Saudi royal counselor agreed that the bombing was hurting
America more than the Taliban. "As long as the
U.S. keeps killing civilians, it will not differ from
the organizations it is fighting against "the only
difference is that the U.S. apologizes," said Ismet
Berkan, editor of Radikal.
Exactly
after one year since the attacks the United States in
now planning to expand the military campaign against
terrorism to Iraq and drawing a very cautious response
even from its strongest allies the United Kingdom. While
the Arab nations have already shown strong opposition
against war in Afghanistan, they see this expansion
to Iraq as threat to the entire region and are very
skeptical about the whole issue. The Europeans, strong
allies of U.S. though supportive of U.S. campaign against
terrorism and al-Qaeda are somewhat doubtful of targeting
specific countries. Many of the nation state's, politicians,
intellectuals, journalists who supported U.S. strategy
in Afghanistan and admitted that it was right are raising
strong doubts about U.S. plans to expand its war to
Iraq. The suspicion is greater because the U.S. has
not been able to destroy the Al-Qaeda network and it
has been suggested that the U.S is moving too fast and
in the wrong direction.
In
Britain the United States strongest ally, the view on
current U.S. policy is no different than in Germany.
The Prime Minister Tony Blair is been termed as President
Bush's poodle and everywhere Blair turns to win support
of U.S. policy there are voices telling him to pull
back from military entanglement in Iraq. In Continental
Europe, in his Cabinet, in his Parliament, in his own
Party, in the opinion polls he has been criticized severely
for being America's puppet, as if blindly following
Bush's orders. Almost all writers, politicians, intellectuals
and general public are against U.S. policy to attack
Iraq, even Tony Blair had doubts about attacking Iraq
but later he said in an interview that we have to side
with U.S. The Telegraph newspaper did a youth survey,
and a huge majority of young Britons thought America
was "aggressive", "inward-looking",
"concerned only with its own place in the world".
Thirty seven percent thought Bush was either "poor"
or "dreadful. Though Tony Blair sees himself as
a crucial bridge between Europe and America, but on
Iraq the two continents are further apart then ever.
As most of the writers say Blair finds himself stretched
on rack between domestic/European and Americans.
Many
Saudi Arabian and Arab Emirates writers and newspapers
criticize U.S. of being biased and its policy as being
un-balanced. Further many Middle East countries think
that West is equating Islam and Muslims with terrorism,
and that acts of some fundamentalists cannot be compared
with the faith of Islam. They claim that the U.S. policy
to attack Iraq and other nations shows how arrogant
and unilateral its policies are.
Back
in America the government's policies have huge support
and the people are supporting anything, which has got
anything to do with combating terrorism unaware of the
consequences. In the immediate wake of September 11,
more than 80 per cent of Americans supported an invasion
of Iraq, even though no one then had established an
unshakeable connection or indeed any connection between
the Iraqi regime and al-Qaeda. The response to all the
doubts and suspicion raised in most part of the world
and by politicians, leaders and intellectuals are on
one side, the government and public of America seems
to have one view, that those who are raising doubts
are not committed to the cause and further they cannot
see the grave danger that people like Saddam pose to
our security.
The
newspapers studied in the two regions of Europe and
Middle East has raised some strong arguments about the
U.S. policy. The Europeans who are a strong ally to
United States and have provided military and monetary
funds in past and in Afghanistan, state that the U.S.
is going in the wrong direction and war against terrorism
need not necessarily use force. The government and newspaper
argue that terrorism can be eliminated by other methods,
by preventing guys like Saddam getting weapons and if
Saddam cooperates with U.N. inspection and lets the
inspectors check the territory, it is a better option
than invading the country. While the Middle East governments
and newspapers see U.S. policies as a self-interest
and not sincere in eliminating terrorism because it
keeps on supporting Israel, countries like Iran think
that U.S. created the whole mess by supporting fascist
regimes and fundamentalists and instead of learning
from its mistakes it is once again going on the destructive
path.
Yet,
one thing I common is their support against terrorism-its
just the manner in which it is to be eliminated that
is being debated. So until the world comes up with a
better solution, the US policy reigns supreme.
Newspapers
studied:
Telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk
Tehran
Times: http://www.tehrantimes.com/
FAZ
weekly: http://www.faz.com
Khaleej
Times: http://www.khaleejtimes.co.ae/
|
