Monday, December 8, 2008

Le problemas que Obama debera confrontar

(Languages of this post: Interlingua, English)

Ben que nos es in le prime parte del seculo vinti e un, le problemas de politica exterior que Obama debera confrontar es multo simile al problemas de Europa al fin del seculo dece e nove con le competition economic e militar inter le diverse nationes del region.

Obama debera confrontar simultaneemente problemas statounitese domestic, problemas del calefaction global, e le reforma de institutiones global.

Le plus importante problemas international essera (1) le lucta contra fanaticos religiose musulman desde Mesopotamia usque Afghanistan e Pakistan, (2) problemas con Iran e su programma nuclear e su relationes con Israel, (3) un possibile confrontation contra un Russia novemente expansioniste, e (4) le emergentia de India e China como superpotentias in vinti o trenta annos.

Istes, naturalmente, non es le problemas que Obama preferirea confrontar, e omne iste problemas in lor interactiones es complicate e instabile.

Si nos retira nostre truppas de Iraq pro inviar les a Afghanistan, un guerra civil sanguinari poterea disvelloppar se in Iraq. Il anque pare probabile que nos non potera pacificar Afghanistan. (Le britannicos e le russos ante nos essayava a facer isto, ma illes eventualmente esseva repulsate per le afghanis.)

Iran a iste puncto es un enigma. Si nos poteva negotiar con le iranis pro abandonar lor programma pro construer bombas nuclear e recognoscer le derecto de Israel a exister, qual es le quid pro quo que illes demandarea pro un tal accordo?

Le ambitiones de Iran anque essera influentiate per un altere factor significante. A causa del ineptitude del administration de Bush, le iranis possibilemente concludera que le imperio american tosto va a imploder, lassante lor pais libere a sasir controlo del Medio Oriente sin concessiones al Statos Unite.

E ben que le iranis forsan comenciara negotiationes con nos, forsan illes potera extender su conferentias bilateral con nos usque illes finalmente ganiara le tempore del qual illes habera besonio pro disveloppar armas nuclear.

Si nos move iste discussion a Afghanistan, le afghanis considera le governamento de Kabul debile e corrupte (como le governamente anterior establite per Russia). A causa de iste circumstantia, le talibanes forsan potera establir lor proprie governamento a Kabul.

Que nos nunc considera Pakistan. Iste pais nunc confronta un crise politic, un crise economic, un rebellion jihadiste, un armea propense a colpos de stato, e un servicio de intelligentia con ligamines al talibanes. Il es anque multo possibile que grande sectores del population de Pakistan appoia le talibanes e resisterea le governamento de Zadari (specialmente si ille appoia le Statos Unite), qui ha problemas politic e personal troppo grande pro permitter que ille governa solidemente le pais.

Si nos move nunc al problemas inter Israel e Palestina, Obama ha dicite que le securitate de Israel es "un concepto fundamentalmente juste". Ma ille anque ha monstrate un plus grande quantitate de sympathia pro le problemas del gente de Palestina que le altere presidentes statounitese ante ille.

Nostre relationes con Europa nunc es minus problematic. Sin le divisiones create per le "cortina ferree", le paises de Europa es nunc assatis democratic--alicunes ex illes mesmo plus democratic que le Statos Unite. Ben que le europeos nunc ha relevate le Statos Unite in le Balkanes post le conflictos in ille region inter 1990 (mille nove centos novanta) e 2000 (duo mille), le Europeos, post le disastros del duo guerras mundial del seculo vinti, es multo reluctante a rearmar se, e illes non vole participar in le stabilisation de Afghanistan con fortias militar.

E ben que le europeos vole preservar OTAN, illes non sape si illes vole expander su rolo pro luctar contra le talibanes in Afghanistan o usar lo solmente pro proteger le Europa occidental de un possibile invasion nove ex Russia.

Si nos considera Asia, su industrialisation augmenta problemas de calefaction global, ma illo es le motor de su disveloppamento economic. Le industrialisation de Asia anque indica que, si le humanitate supervivera, iste nove seculo non essera dominate per le paises Euro-Atlantic, e le economia de China poterea esser plus grande que le economia american comenciante in le anno 2030 (vinti trenta). In iste epoca, China anque devenira un potentia militar global.

Assi, Obama habera le problema de influentiar le disveloppamento de nove institutitiones international que assecura le prosperitate de Europa e America durante que India e China devenira plus prospere.

Al fin del seculo dece e nove, Britannia esseva le superpotentia del mundo. Al fin del seculo vinti le Statos Unite occupava iste rolo. Duo grandissime guerras quasi suicidal causava iste cambio. Il es possibile que le competition pro ressources natural inter India, China, e le Statos Unite causara un nove guerra simile. Ma le uso de missiles e bombas nuclear probabilemente essera un parte essential de un tal guerra, que facilemente poterea causar le extermination del humanitate ante que nostre possibile (probabile?) extermination per le califaction global.


The Problems that Obama Will Have to Confront

Though we are in the first part of the twenty-first century, the foreign-policy problems that Obama will have to confront are very similar to Europe's problems at the end of the nineteenth century with the economic and military competition among the various nations of the region.

Obama will have to confront simultaneously domestic American problems, global-warming problems, and the reform of global institutions.

The most important international problems will be (1) the fight against Muslim religious fanatics from Mesopotamia to Afghanistan and Pakistan, (2) problems with Iran and its nuclear program and its relations with Israel, (3) a possible confrontation with a newly expansionist Russia, and (4) the emergence of India and China as superpowers in twenty or thirty years.

These, naturallly, are not the problems that Obama would prefer to confront, and all these problems in their interactions are complicated and unstable.

If we withdraw our troops from Iraq to send them to Afghanistan, a bloody civil war could break out in Iraq. It also seems probable that we will not be able to pacify Afghanistan. (The British and the Russians before us tried to do this, but they were eventually repulsed by the afghanis.)

Iran at this point is an enigma. If we could negotiate with the Iranians to abandon their programs to construct nuclear bombs and recognize the right of Israel to exist, what is the quid pro quo that they would demand for such an agreement?

The ambitions of Iran will also be influenced by another significant factor: Because of the ineptitude of Bush's administration, the Iranians will possibly conclude that the American Empire soon will implode, leaving their country free to seize control of the Middle East without concessions to the United States.

And though the Iranians will perhaps start negotiations with us, perhaps they will be able to extend their bilateral conferences with us until they finally gain the time they will need to develop nuclear arms.

If we move this discussion on to Afghanistan, the Afghanis consider the Kabul government to be weak and corrupt (just like the former government established by Russia). Because of this circumstance, the Taliban perhaps will be able to establish their own government in Kabul.

Let's now consider Pakistan. This country is now dealing with a political crisis, an economic crisis, a jihadist rebellion, an army inclined toward coups d'etat, and an intelligence service with connections to the Taliban. It is also very possible that large sectors of the population of Pakistan supports the Taliban and would resist the government of Zadari (especially if he supports the United States), who has political and personal problems that are too big to allow him to solidly govern the country.

If we move now to the problems between Israel and Palestine, Obama has said that the security of Israel is "a fundamentally just concept." But he also has shown more sympathy for the problems of the people of Palestine than other U.S. presidents before him.

Our relations with Europe are now less problematic. Without the divisions created by the Iron Curtain, the countries of Europe are now rather democratic--some of them even more democratic than the United States. Though the Europeans now have relieved the United States in the Balkans after the conflict in that region between 1990 (nineteen ninety) and 2000 (two thousand), the Europeans, after the disasters of the two world wars of the twentieth century, are very reluctant to rearm themselves, and they don't want to participate in the stabilization of Afghanistan with military forces.

And though the Europeans want to preserve NATO, they don't know if they want to expand its role to fight against the Taliban in Afghanistan or use it only to protect Western Europe from a possible new invasion from Russia.

If we consider Asia, its industrialization is increasing problems of global warming, but it is the engine of its economic development. The industrialization of Asia also indicates that, if humanity is to survive, this new century will not be dominated by the Euro-Atlantic countries, and the economy of China could be bigger than the American economy starting in the year 2030 (twenty thirty). In this period, China also will become a global military power.

Thus, Obama will have the problem of influencing the development of new international institutions that will assure the prosperity of Europe and America as India and China become more prosperous.

At the end of the nineteenth century, Britain was the superpower of the world. At the end of the twentieth century the United States occupied this role. Two very large and almost suicidal wars caused this change. It is possible that competition for natural resources among India, China, and the United States will cause a new and similar war. But the use of missiles and nuclear bombs probably will be an essential part of such a war, which could easily cause the extermination of humanity before our possible (probable?) extermination through global warming.

No comments: