Americas Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq by Kinzer Stephen - Essay Example

 Overthrow Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq by Kinzer Stephen The world has in the past and recently experienced several activities of military power whereby governments have been overthrown in the name of democracy and individual interests. For instance, the recent overthrow of President Saddam Hussein of Iraq might have turned the whole issue of ‘regime change’ into a present-day or contemporary catchphrase, but it has been a strategy of the foreign policy of the United States of America for a period of more than one hundred and ten years. Starting with the overthrow of the monarchy of Hawaii in the year 1893, the writer talks about all the foreign governments that have been overthrown by the help of the United States of America, whereby some of them he has talked about before on the ‘All the Shah's Men and much more. There are some recent invasions that have taken places such as those of Panama and Grenada, which the readers might be well aware of as compared to those that took place some several years ago such as those of Nicaragua and Iran1. However, the writer, Kinzer, who is a foreign New York Times correspondent, presents a very comprehensive tale propinquity to all of his narratives2. Although some of the assertions of the writer outwit themselves, like when he suggests that good behavior from the government of the United States in the Spanish-American conflict might have averted the ascending of Castro about a half-century later; he presents a persuasive case that the intervention by the United States makes the politics of the world to be unstable and usually leaves nations in the worst position that than they were before the intervention. The argument of the writer is not new, but it is presented in moderate tones that are unusual, and which might lead to him appealing to a larger audience than the usual crew of the reactionary leftists. With every overthrow, we find that the governments of the United States continually chased short-term gains, without thinking about their disastrous repercussions that might ensue several years later3. The writer perceptively talks about the connecting events that came after the regime changes in the Arab world: That is in the year 1953, Mohammad Mossadegh, the Prime Minister of Iran was overthrown by the CIA for the Britons, replacing him with a tyrant who did not have any qualms about the welcoming or acceptance of foreign oil firms. However, that operation spurred radical fundamentalists who were led by Ayatollah Khomeini in organizing and coordinating the resistance of 1978, and their activities served as the inspiration to the other Muslims all over the world. The Lebanon's Hezbollah guerrillas of the present day are the devout successors of the Ayatollah and the protégés of the major Iranian clerics4. The writer documents how five presidents of the United States cultivated the Taliban in Afghanistan, at first attempting to frustrate the Soviets and then later to acquire and shelter a route of oil-pipeline. On paper, we find that every plan or overthrow is shaky and brazen, but the writer shows how such operations’ planners, once aim at their final objective, loose any long-lasting or long-term sense of national security or financial responsibility. All through the 1980s, when the Soviets conquered Afghanistan, the United States financed the rebels via Pakistan and did not attempt to play any role in making decisions regarding the individuals or parties that were to receive the gifts. Consequently, the people of Pakistan used the finances in establishing the Taliban group and do away with the nationalist, secular or leftist movements. This was evident even one Afghan lamented that the United States was financing her own enemies. By the invasion of the Republic of Iraq in the year 2003, the United States came full circle in the region of Middle East, whereby it once again enhanced the influence of the Islamic groups in Iran and also all through the region5. The purpose of covering a whole century of intrigue and policy limits Kinzer, however, it is surprising that the tone of the book is more relaxed and not terse. The readers who are informed will definitely appreciate the fast pace and several ironies of the writer. I do not have any doubt in my mind that America has uncompromisingly interfered with other countries’ internal affairs. That is a fact that cannot be refuted and everyone wherever in the world can attest to it. Nevertheless, it is true that it is very difficult to give a justification for most of the interferences by this nation as it was either enhanced by or in the individual interests of the alien-residents of America or even large organizations that just wanted to manipulate the local people as well as the national resources that they possess. Kinzer offers several examples of these cases and does it analytically and without bias. America has several things to be ashamed of concerning its foreign practices and policies. We should just be fair, and take a look at the outings that the writer talks about from historical perspective. Whereas it is true that the government of the United States of America has been engaged in a number of questionable and perhaps acts that are condemnable in foreign affairs, we find that it has actually not been doing it along or singlehandedly6. It has tried as much as possible not to have the monopoly on international exploitation and intrigue. Some other countries that are also guilty of the establishment of their own empires or territories, invading some other countries, involving themselves in appalling and shameful practices include France, the Netherlands, England, Germany, Spain, Turkey, Russia and Japan7. This should not be used as an excuse by America concerning its present or even past wrongdoings as it is the one that been in the driving seat, but it is important to out these issues in some perspective. If America is to be called the ‘Great Satan,” then it has a very big company or allies. Several other nations should realize that they might be part of the global problem too. Considering that, America should do much better on the global stage. The United States should be a good example of human rights and democratic reform and it cannot be able to do that by attempting to force such via the military force. America might at present be the superpower on the global campus, it but it should not be the biggest problem in the global schoolyard. The writer ends his text with an observation that we should all take heart. He states that America emerged the superpower in the world in a quicker manner than nearly any other empire or nation in the world has ever done. Full of the self-confidence and exuberance of the youth, it created a sense of unconstrained possibility8. Most Americans had the belief that since they have a great success in the building of their own nation, they do not only duplicate that achievement internationally but were called by destiny to do so. The writer believes that is not possible for the United States to ever achieve its objective and dream of in the long-term when she gets caught in the attempts to implement the regime changes. This is particularly as a result of the fact that one cannot be able to force into power, leaders in foreign nations that are both indisputably popular and well-liked by their compatriots, and also who are seeking to protect the interest of the United States. It is beyond doubt that America is the world’s superpower, and it is high time that it stops being part of the world’s problems, but be part of the solution. References Kinzer Stephen. (2006). Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq. Times Books Bulosan, Carlos. America is in the Heart: A Personal History. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Company, 1998. Bailey, Richard. Nineteenth-Century English. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan Press, 2007. Barone, Michael. The Almanac of American Politics. Washington, D.C.: National Journal, 2005. Kennedy, David M. Freedom from Fear: The American People in Depression and War. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006. Read More