Iraq and America from marginality to the level of effective relationship

by **Rocky** Wed 24 Apr 2024, 4:42 am

Rocky: Admin Assist; Posts : 282968
Join date : 2012-12-21

Post n°1

Iraq and America from marginality to the level of effective relationship

by Rocky Wed 24 Apr 2024, 4:42 am

Iraq and America from marginality to the level of effective relationship

Iraq 04/24/2024
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

This article is an answer to the question, but taking into account two additional elements: The first is the existence of multiple models of effective relations that have linked many countries with America, through which they have achieved great successes. The other element is the positive data from the visit of Prime Minister Muhammad Shia al-Sudani to America. There is no difference in effectiveness between the origin of the visit and its occurrence, or the results that resulted from it, as the visit is considered positive in itself, in addition to its data.

Japanese cucumber
Supporters of unilateral political analysis (who are mostly beginners or closed ideologues, if we exclude paid pens) often give us the impression that Iraq's relationship with America is the beginning and the end of the story, and that the position on it ranges between two absolutes. Such as employment and sovereignty, dependency and independence, dignity and its opposite, and similar closed dualities, projecting a rich historical experience in international relations, which left behind multiple adaptations to the countries’ relationship with the United States, over many decades.
Since we cannot go through the file in all its details, we will limit ourselves to a few examples that are close to the situation in Iraq and even more complex than it, and that reflected effective experiences of this relationship during the last eight decades that followed the end of World War II and the global rise of America.
We start with the Japanese option, which has some elements similar to the Iraqi example, but in a more complex way. In 1945 AD, Japan surrendered after America hit it with the atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and General Douglas MacArthur arrived in Tokyo as Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces, marking the beginning of the American occupation (something similar to the arrival of Jay Garner in Iraq after the fall of Saddam, and after him Paul Bremer). These were the first steps in the project. The American government reduced the sanctity of the emperor in the Japanese national conscience and stripped him of his semi-divinity (destroying the symbolism of Saddam in the Iraqi example), and began strict measures to purge the army, public offices, and political elites of supporters of the former regime (dissolving the army, de-Baathification, accountability, and justice in the Iraqi example), and approving a new constitution. The way for women's participation in elections was opened for the first time in Japan, then the signing of the peace treaty and mutual security agreement between the two countries in San Francisco in 1951 AD, and the announcement of an end to the occupation in 1952 AD, and then the Japanese government issued a white paper in 1956 AD, according to which it announced the end of the post-war and occupation period. .
In 1960 AD, Tokyo renewed the security treaty with America, and during the era of Prime Minister Yasuo Hiro Nakasui (1982 - 1987 AD), Tokyo presented to Washington a strategy of equal participation, not out of a vacuum or a slogan, but rather on the strength of the facts of the situation, and the tremendous economic growth and progress that Japan had achieved and witnessed. The entire world witnessed leaps in national production, many times exceeding that of America, Germany, France, and Britain (see the details of the numbers: Issues of our time, p. 192 onwards). Through it, the yen (Japanese currency) was transformed into a global currency since 1985 AD, and economic reports went to: The total amount of capital investments that Japan has witnessed is the largest of its kind in human history (see for details: Japan... A New Vision, Patrick Smith, The World of Knowledge, No. 268).
Once again, the model of Japanese progress did not emerge from a vacuum, but rather from the capabilities of the Japanese interior itself, and through an effective will to the relationship with America, which transformed from striking Japan with nuclear weapons and occupying it, to what was later known as the “Japanese miracle.” Some characteristics of Japanese subjectivity are considered: The Japanese, Edwin Reischauer, The World of Knowledge, No. 136).

German cucumber
One of the models of an effective, complex relationship with the United States is undoubtedly the German model, which emerged in just a quarter of a century from the abyss of the abyss to the strength after defeat, and began competing for the third economy in the world. In May 1945 AD, when Germany was defeated, there was no state, administration, or borders. The economy collapsed, Germany lost 60-90 percent of its fixed capital, Allied aircraft bombed its major cities, 3 million homes were demolished, and 20 percent of the population was killed. In a month August 1945 AD Germany was divided into four regions according to the Potsdam Agreement between the victorious Allies, so that the area of West Germany stabilized at the equivalent of half of France, after it had lost, as a result of its fragmentation into two countries, Western and Eastern, about 48 percent of its area before the war.
The decision of the victorious capitals was to “domesticate” Germany so that it would not regain its power and spark a new war, as it did in the First and Second World Wars. The domestication plans led by America amounted to thinking about “sterilizing” men to limit births, as well as turning it into a country. A backward agriculturalist who only plants and eats. In practice, the American plans went as the Secretary of the Treasury at that time, Morgentar, and even President Franklin Roosevelt himself, spoke about them publicly before the end of the war and before his death. By eliminating the industrial structure, especially the iron, mechanical and chemical industries, to prevent the growth of its military power again.
In addition to partition, the demobilization of the army, and the ban on infrastructure industries, the West - especially America - stole German scientists and German scientific energies, especially on the military side, and most of them were transferred to the United States. In 1948 AD, the old German currency (the Reichsmark) was canceled and replaced with a new currency linked to the US dollar. The misery in the daily life of the German person reached a terrifying extent, and he lives the requirements of this life within the limits of what the food card (ration in the Iraqi example) allows.
The German man did not surrender to his fate, so he began to restore the spirit of national solidarity, mobilize the effectiveness of collective action, and insist on achieving achievement, from a zero point, which was the collection of rubble and remnants of war, after they asked the Allied authorities for permission to do so!
Germany did not resist its fate and insist on militarization and the resurrection of its ancient military greatness, through resistance and wasting its human energies and the like. Rather, it infiltrated the renaissance and internationalism through development and economics, just as Japan did, to increase its national product to unprecedented levels, and to become on par with Japan after only a quarter of a century, the term “miracle.” "Economic", which is dismantling American hegemony with the strength of its economy, benefiting, just like Japan, from the military security cover of the United States, devoting itself entirely to internal development and the requirements of its economic progress, and restoring living well-being to be much better than it was before the war and defeat (see the details of the numbers: Issues Our Time, pp. 184 onwards).

Vietnam: the amazing example
Germany since the Prussian era, and the efforts of the great Otto von Bismarck to unify its states and establish the German Empire or the Second Reich, during his long premiership (1862 - 1890 AD) is a Western country and an economy that transformed from feudalism to capitalism, and therefore it is a solid entity in the Western system, and perhaps it was The strongest force in this system, in its European part.
Yes, Japan cannot be compared to Germany, as it is from a strategic environment that competes with the Western system, both its European and American sides, which is Asia. However, the contradictions in the relationship between Japan and America were not as great as the contradictions between Vietnam and America. The story of the relationship of war, destruction, and blood between America and Vietnam is well known. Its chapters lasted twenty years (1955 - 1975 AD), during which America’s losses amounted to (58) thousand dead and more than a quarter of a million wounded, and it spent (168) billion dollars (more than 1000 billion in today’s value). While Vietnam's losses amounted to one million people at the lowest estimates, and about 4 million in others. To be one of the greatest stories of regional wars that destroyed civilization and humanity during the twentieth century.
But let's look at the picture now that it is turned upside down. From estrangement to effective relationship, from hostility, blood and destruction, to economic, political and military cooperation, to the point of presenting a strategic partnership project between America, the leader of global capitalism, and the Revolutionary Socialist Republic of Vietnam, during President Biden’s visit to Hanoi in September 2023 AD.
The truth is that since the relationship between Hanoi and Washington was restored during the era of President Bill Clinton in 1995 AD, no American president, whether Democrat or Republican, has failed to visit Vietnam. Democratic President Clinton visited it in November 2000, Republican President Bush Jr. visited it, and Democratic President Obama arrived in Its capital in May 2016, and Republican President Donald Trump visited it twice, in November 2017 and February 2019, and Joe Biden, as Vice President and President, visited it again.
The relationship today between the two parties is strategic, and its political, economic, and even security and military dimensions have transcended all the complexities of the past. None of this was achieved through ready-made imported slogans and statements, but rather through review and hard work, as the economic partnership between Vietnam and America has now become one of the largest partnerships. For example, of Vietnam’s total exports in 2021, which amounted to (336.25) billion dollars, America acquired a percentage of (28.63%) compared to China (16.65%), the European Union (11.93%), and so on. What is surprisingly strange about Vietnamese exports to American markets: Its scope extends over a wide spectrum that begins with electronics, steel, textiles, and transportation products, and extends to shoes, wood products, seafood, and oils, ending with pepper, rice, and coffee.

Nothing is impossible
The distinguished American diplomat in Vietnam, Ted Osius, and the most important American ambassador to Vietnam. Summarize the complex, ambiguous and complex relationship between the two parties, and how it transformed from blood and hostility, to cooperation from the perspective of economics and then strategic dimensions. With a vision he published in a book, entitled: “Nothing is Impossible: America’s Reconciliation with...
Vietnam.
Within the limits of my tracking, I did not find an Arabic translation of the book, but I returned to the Persian translation, as the academic, media, and even political elite in Iran found the possibility of using the Vietnamese model as a guide in correcting or rebuilding the relationship between the Islamic Republic and the United States, especially since there is no doubt about the revolutionary experience in Vietnam is against America, something that has never happened in Iran, and therefore no one dares to question the principle of Vietnam and its revolution and add to its exorbitant resistance to America. Therefore, these circles took the initiative not only to translate the book “Nothing is Impossible,” but also worked to stimulate a serious discussion regarding its idea, and the possibility of replicating the Vietnamese model of transitioning from war to peace, through an effective and productive relationship for both parties.
Regarding the ambassador, his book, and his opinions, you can return in Arabic to the “Happy Vietnam” website, especially a very long definition, published by the “Dan Viet” newspaper, and an interview with Ambassador Ted Osius.
Himself.
Strategic Framework Agreement
Since its entry into force at the beginning of 2009, the Strategic Framework Agreement has been, and continues to be, the Iraqi choice in the relationship with the United States. Within a decade and a half of this agreement, I have not read criticism that affected its content, feasibility, and benefits for Iraq, if implemented. Failure to implement it does not mean futility, but rather indicates the necessity of striving to adhere to and implement it. Despite all of that, this agreement, and others like it, are merely means and tools for organizing the relationship. If the Iraqi or American party finds it necessary to amend it by adding or deleting it, or even replacing it completely, there is no problem with that and no harm, as what is important is the transition from the marginal, static relationship to the relationship. The actor. Here I would like to be frank and clear. Even if we take the maximum suggested by the logic of borrowed slogans and imported statements about others, from the hypothesis of the existence of “occupation” and “lack of sovereignty,” the problem is not in the agreement, but in the absence of an effective relationship, and the survival of Iraqi politics within the scope of the marginal relationship, by moving away from real political and diplomatic work. ; Imported slogans and sayings do not solve the problem, but rather increase it. What solves the problem is entering into a deep relationship that establishes a comprehensive understanding and comprehensive knowledge of the United States, and gives the Iraqi politician the ability to maneuver and bargain, and to always make settlements in the interest of Iraq, and in order to solve its problems and remove its dependencies on the economy, energy, security, defense, transportation, health, education, and preserving its wealth and currency. And controlling its banks, as dependence on the wills of the regional capitals is no less bad in its consequences for Iraq than others. Dependency cannot be divided into two, and there is no good and bad dependency. Rather, it is rejected by everyone in the region and the world. I am almost certain (and I know that there is no certainty in politics!) that the countries of the region and the Iraqi neighborhood collectively do not want Iraq to transform its relationship with America from marginality, quiescence, and non-relationship, to the heart, body, and core of the effective relationship, and every neighboring country, north, south, east, and west, does so. This is for its own reasons; Some of them are so as not to lose their interventionist pastoral role and influence; The other is in order not to lose any of its trade and profits, by keeping Iraq low on its goods and waste. Some of them are in order not to lose their role and diminish their importance in the region if Iraq plays its role and uses its wealth and vital, geopolitical, geopolitical and strategic energies.
Marginality and irrelevance are what most comfort the countries of the region and all of Iraq's neighbors, without exception, because it is a recipe that benefits everyone, and brings benefits to them and to them, and Iraq remains an arena for their agenda, games, and frivolous interventions, and a cash cow from which everyone benefits, without him getting anything, so he and his children will always be in pain. For others, sheep.
Without indulging in real relationships, the required understanding will not be achieved, and therefore we cannot establish a true assessment of our interests, and the benefits that this relationship brings or the negatives and harms that come with it (just like any relationship with any other country in the world). Thus, we increase and maximize the gains and reduce the losses. And the harms, all of this is based on Iraq’s self-interest, and not by naive exaggeration and exaggeration of fears through imported slogans. All of these do not build strategies, but rather keep Iraq weak and subservient to the interests of the gentiles and strangers, and an arena for increasing their gains.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Iraq and America from marginality to the level of effective relationship

Iraq and America from marginality to the level of effective relationship

Iraq and America from marginality to the level of effective relationship

Similar topics

Similar topics

Latest topics

World Headline News

Board Rules Click Below

Disclaimer

Keywords

Search Query

Display results as : Posts Topics
Tags
Advanced Search