When the wall fell in Germany nearly three decades ago, and the Soviet Union crumbled shortly after, the world breathed a sigh of relief as the biggest Damocles Sword of nuclear war over humanity dissipated. But unfortunately, this did not signal the end of the Cold War for the United States, and over the next 30 years the sole superpower would use their military industrial complex and foreign policies to attempt to impose their hegemony and empire into the lives of every people and every nation.
The foundation for what we would later call the ‘responsibility to police the world and keep other nations from growing in power’ stems from a document written by Paul Wolfowitz, and would become known as the Wolfowitz Doctrine. And similar to older historic ‘doctrines’ like the Monroe and Truman Doctrines, it was based on U.S. power and their determined right to intervene as they saw fit in any and all regions and countries that they perceived as in opposition to American foreign policy.
In a broad new policy statement that is in its final drafting phase, the Defense Department asserts that America’s political and military mission in the post-cold-war era will be to ensure that no rival superpower is allowed to emerge in Western Europe, Asia or the territories of the former Soviet Union.
A 46-page document that has been circulating at the highest levels of the Pentagon for weeks, and which Defense Secretary Dick Cheney expects to release later this month, states that part of the American mission will be “convincing potential competitors that they need not aspire to a greater role or pursue a more aggressive posture to protect their legitimate interests.”
The classified document makes the case for a world dominated by one superpower whose position can be perpetuated by constructive behavior and sufficient military might to deter any nation or group of nations from challenging American primacy. - New York Times, 1992
It is from this doctrine and mindset that has led the United States to intervene on nearly every continent, and against dozens of countries, including those in the Balkins, Africa, the Middle East, and most recently, in the South China Sea to attempt to keep nations such as Russia and China from growing in strength, both militarily and diplomatically.
And at the root of all of this is the maniacal fear by the U.S. establishment of losing ultimate global power, and in keeping the world chained to the dollar and to Washington hegemony. And in doing so the U.S. has brought the world to the brink of a new global war, and by their actions have made nuclear annihilation once again a potential threat.
Yet there is a suddenly a new and perhaps even greater threat to the neo-conservative establishment, and it is coming from within, not from without. And it is being seen via the successful victory by Donald Trump to the Republican party ticket for the 2016 Presidential race, and the cabal that runs the U.S. empire is scared to death that he may actually be victorious and bring down the empire by ending both NATO and the Cold War once and for all.
If Donald Trump is elected US president it will spell the end of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. At least, that’s how a phalanx of US foreign policy pundits and establishment figures see it. Trump once again caused uproar recently with comments that were viewed as undermining a «cornerstone» of US foreign policy since the Second World War.
Ahead of accepting official nomination as the Republican party presidential candidate, the billionaire property magnate told the New York Times in an interview that, if elected, he would not automatically deploy American military forces to defend another member of NATO if it were attacked.
As the NYT noted Trump’s conditionality regarding NATO was the first time any senior American politician has uttered such a radical change in policy. It overturns «American cornerstone policy of the past 70 years». - Strategic Culture.org
Out of the two primary candidates for the Presidency of the United States, only one speaks with the conviction of seeking peace in our time through a diplomatic and economic process rather than through the barrel of a gun. And as we have seen this week from every Democratic speaker and from every establishment talking head, the fear that Trump would bring about an end to autonomous U.S. aggression around the world is on par with the same threats that John F. Kennedy spoke of doing to the military industrial complex just months before he was assassinated in Dallas.
The 2016 election may actually boil down to a choice between peaceful co-habitation and better foreign relations with our neighbors, or the world rushing headlong towards World War III. And while no one really knows what Donald Trump will actually do should he find himself in office come November, we already have a long track record of what Hillary Clinton will do… just ask Muammar Qhadaffi when Hillary sat there laughing while he was brutally assassinated by allies to her State Department.
Kenneth Schortgen Jr is a writer for Secretsofthefed.com,Roguemoney.net, and To the Death Media, and hosts the popular web blog, The Daily Economist. Ken can also be heard Wednesday afternoons giving an weekly economic report on the Angel Clark radio show.