Europe's refiners struggle to replace Libyan oil! New Phase of Oil War Controlled by USA! Thus,Saudi willing, able to make up Libya oil shortfall!
GLOBAL MARKETS-Oil surges, dollar falls over Libya uprising!
Troubled Galaxy Destroyed Dreams, Chapter 585
Palash Biswas
http://indianholocaustmyfatherslifeandtime.blogspot.com/
http://basantipurtimes.blogspot.com/
Brent crude nears $120 a barrel as Libya output falls
* Swiss franc hits record high as US dollar falls broadly
* U.S. stocks halt this week's slide, hover at break-even (Updates equity market prices)
Europe's refiners struggle to replace Libyan oil! New Phase of Oil War Controlled by USA!However,the loss of Libyan oil is a heavy blow to European refiners who face a costly struggle to replace the easy-to-refine crude because of a shortage of matching grades.Saudi Arabia is willing and able to plug any oil supply gap and has the capacity to provide all types of oil, including the light, high quality crude produced by OPEC member Libya, senior Saudi sources said on Thursday.Search Results
-
News for oil wars
Telegraph.co.ukNew Delhi wants more oil market regulation
2 hours ago24 (UPI) -- New Delhi called on the OPEC oil cartel to increase oil production and urged tighter control on energy markets during the Arab uprising. ...UPI.com - 7322 related articles -
Oil Wars
6 Jul 2010 ... Oil Wars. Ongoing analysis of events in Venezuela and Iraq .... But would it be realistic? |. # posted by ow : 6:36 PM ...
oilwars.blogspot.com/ - Cached - Similar -
Videos for oil wars
Oil War - Nigeria
23 min - 5 Jul 2007
Uploaded by journeymanpictures
youtube.com
Oil Wars - Sudan
28 min - 30 Nov 2007
Uploaded by journeymanpictures
youtube.com -
The Debate: Was Oil a Motive for the War on Iraq and Afghanistan ...
Is oil an undisclosed motive for war in Iraq and Afghanistan? Has oil influenced American military decisions? Sign the online petition for a public ...
www.thedebate.org/ - Cached - Similar -
Oil Wars :: Western "Humanitarianism" in Iraq :: (by Nafeez ...
The reason is clear: Iraq contains 10 per cent of the world's oil reserves. ... The aim of the war, right from the outset, was to smash the country's ...
www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq38.html - Cached - Similar -
Wars for Oil
An examination of the holes in the official story regarding the events of September 11th, 2001. An alternative explanation. The use of 9/11 as the pretext ...
www.serendipity.li/wtc9.htm - Cached - Similar - [PDF]
Oil Wars and World Orders New and Old
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
by BJ Silver - Cited by 289 - Related articles
throughout this long period encompassing two world wars.3. Of course after World War Two there emerged the 'Second. World' of state capitalism and the ...
libcom.org/files/silver.pdf - Similar -
The New Frontier: Genetically Modified Oil Wars
7 Jul 2010 ... The next generation of biotech crops are designed to express alleged nutritional benefits. However, advertising such foods as "healthy" ...
gmo-journal.com/.../the-new-frontier-genetically-modified-oil-wars/ - Cached -
WAR ON IRAQ - IS OIL A MOTIVE FOR THE MILITARY CONQUEST OF IRAQ ...
Is oil money a motive for the invasion of Iraq? Read the evidence and decide for yourself.
www.thedebate.org/thedebate/iraq.asp - Cached - Similar -
Oil Wars Come Home to Roost | Dissident Voice
26 May 2010 ... Even the birds are pissed. Whether it's the Mockingbird who guards the footpath down by the bus stop. Or the Blue Jay who cusses across my ...
dissidentvoice.org/2010/05/oil-wars-come-home-to-roost/ - Cached
MUAMMAR Gaddafi blamed al-Qa'ida for an insurrection that has wrenched control of much of eastern Libya as he addressed his divided nation for the second time this week to galvanise support for his crumbling regime.
Speaking on state television, the embattled Mr Gaddafi insisted the uprising against his 41-year rule was not a people's revolt as in neighbouring Egypt and Tunisia, but fuelled by Osama bin Laden's network.
In marked contrast to a 75-minute address from a podium outside his Tripoli home on Tuesday, this time Mr Gaddafi spoke by telephone from an undisclosed location in an intervention that lasted barely 20 minutes.
His decision to speak by telephone rather than make an on-screen appearance has raised questions about his whereabouts, and indicates that his power base may be shrinking.
Amid continued fighting, swathes of the east of the country have fallen to opposition control and others into lawlessness, residents and reporters said.
World oil prices have surged toward $120 a barrel as unrest grips Libya.
Italian oil major ENI <ENI.MI said on Thursday the nation's output had fallen by 1.2 million barrels per day (bpd).
Traders and analysts have said the loss of virtually all Libya's production is particularly serious because it is high quality, easy-to-refine oil in contrast to the heavier crudes often associated with the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries.
"Saudi is willing and capable of supplying oil of the same quality, either Arab extra light or through blending," one of the sources said.
"OPEC stipulates that it is able to supply all types of oil if needed," the source added. "There is no reason for the price to go higher."
Oil surged to almost $120 a barrel and the safe-haven Swiss franc hit a record high on Thursday on fears turmoil in Libya could spread, but gold eased on talk Saudi Arabia could boost its crude output.
U.S. equity markets also hovered near break-even after this week's sharp slide. Analysts said it was too soon to say a long-expected sell-off on Wall Street was over with unrest in North Africa and the Middle East still alive. For details please see: [ID:nN24282475]
The escalating violence in Libya, home to Africa's largest proven oil reserves, lifted benchmark Brent crude oil to its highest level since August 2008 and kindled concerns of an inflationary spike that might stall global recovery. [ID:nLDE71N1AY]
This week's relentless surge in oil prices stung the U.S. dollar against major currencies. The Swiss franc benefited from the turmoil in North Africa while the euro extended gains against the dollar on expectations interest rates in the euro zone will rise earlier than those in the United States.
The dollar fell to a record low of 0.9240 of a Swiss franc CHF=EBS on electronic trading platform EBS.
"The problem with civil unrest is that we don't really know when it's going to end. It might get worse and the supply of oil might come down even more, and that's a big concern for the market," said Sebastian Lynar, sales trader at IG Index.
Copper, considered a harbinger of economic sentiment, firmed after better than expected U.S. jobless data, but it remained under pressure on concerns that higher oil prices driven by violence in Libya could slow economic growth. [ID:nL3E7DO0Q5]
Brent crude futures for April delivery LCOc1 spiked to $119.79 a barrel before easing to $114.55, up $3.30 on the day.
U.S. light sweet crude oil CLc1 also rose but remained under the $100 mark it touched on Wednesday for the first time since October 2008.
Spot gold prices XAU= rose slightly to $1,412.00 an ounce, up just $2.05.
The Financial Times quoted an unnamed official as saying Saudi Arabia was in active talks with European refiners who may be hit by a disruption in Libyan exports.
OPEC has yet to make any formal changes to its output policy.
Saudi Arabia, the world's largest oil exporter, said at talks this week the market was still adequately supplied, but it was always ready to release some of its roughly 4 million bpd of spare capacity on to the markets in the event of a shortage.
Reuters reports:
Violent revolt in Libya as Muammar Gaddafi clings to power has shut down as much as three-quarters of its output, according to some estimates.
Concern the disruption could escalate drove Brent crude futures to nearly $120 a barrel on Thursday, a new 2-1/2 year high, which has already wiped out the profits of some European refineries for making gasoline.
So far, there is no overall lack of oil in the world. Inventories are high and OPEC has an estimated 5 million barrels per day (bpd) of spare capacity.
The producer group has said it is willing and able to release oil on to the market but has so far made no formal change to its output.
Even if OPEC decides to act, many European analysts and traders say the crude most readily available from other OPEC nations is not the kind of light, sweet oil Libya can ship to aging European refiners.
"You are going to have to pay a premium for other crudes. If there's any sort of time constraint and you want them in a hurry you'll have to pay up to get in front of the next guy," said Rob Montefusco, a London-based oil trader at Sucden Financial.
Europe imports around 80 percent of Libya's 1.3 million bpd of exports, according to consultancy Facts Global Energy (FGE). The oil is destined chiefly for France, Germany and above all Italy, which buys around 400,000 bpd of Libyan crude. Its dependency is particularly high as it has many older plants.
World governments scrambled to evacuate stranded nationals from the oil-rich country as world crude prices soared.
The 68-year-old leader accused residents of Az-Zawiyah, a town 50 kilometres west of the capital hit by fierce fighting between his forces and rebels, of siding with the al-Qa'ida leader.
"You in Zawiyah turn to Bin Laden," he said. "They give you drugs."
"It is obvious now that this issue is run by al-Qa'ida," he said, addressing the towns elders. "Those armed youngsters, our children, are incited by people who are wanted by America and the Western world.
He says al-Qa'ida militants were "exploiting" teenagers by giving them "hallucinogenic pills in their coffee with milk, like Nescafe."
Az-Zawiyah is a middle-class satellite town situated on the Mediterranean that is home to a number of pro-Gaddafi military officers and the site of the country's largest oil refinery.
"Those inciting are very few in numbers and we have to capture them. Others have to stay at home. They have guns, they feel trigger happy and they shoot especially when they are stoned with drugs."
The "situation is different from Egypt or Tunisia ... Here the authority is in your hands, the people's hands. You can change authority any way your wish. It's your call. You are the elderly, the head of the tribes, the professors."
"They have been brainwashing the kids in this area and tell them to misbehave. This are the one who are under Bin Laden's influence and authority, under the influence of drugs."
Ten people were killed overnight and dozens more wounded when pro-government forces attacked anti-government protesters in the town.
Quoting its correspondent in Az-Zawiyah, Benghazi-based Quryna added that "the wounded cannot reach the hospitals because of shots being fired in all directions."
Earlier, state news agency Jana said three "terrorists" attacked a security forces post there and slit the throats of three policemen.
Al-Jazeera television, reporting heavy fighting, also quoted witnesses as saying an army unit led by Mr Gaddafi ally Naji Shifsha blasted the minaret of a mosque being occupied by protesters in Az-Zawiyah.
Hundreds of people have been killed since the uprising started in the eastern town of Benghazi on February 15, according to human rights groups, while some politicians say the toll could be as high as 1,000.
In the capital, sustained gunfire was heard in the eastern suburbs during the night. Yesterday morning, the streets were virtually deserted.
In Zouara, towards the Tunisian border, fleeing Egyptian workers said the town was in the control of civilian militias after fierce fighting on Wednesday evening.
There were unconfirmed reports of continuing fighting in the town of Misrata, about 200 kilometres east of Tripoli. Other reports said pro-Mr Gaddafi forces had attacked Sabratha, which lies between Az-Zawiyah and the capital and Sabha, about 650 kilometres to the south.
"Our goal now is Tripoli," one protester told a town hall meeting addressed by defecting generals. "If Tripoli cannot liberate itself."
A dozen army and police commanders came forward in the eastern town of Al-Baida to pronounce their support for the popular revolt, each being wildly applauded by the crowd.
"I have left my job and come to Al-Baida in solidarity with my people," said police General Salah Mathek. "They say I am a traitor but I have principles."
General Abdul Aziz al-Busta said he had refused orders to fire on civilians as the uprising erupted last week. "They asked us to confront the people and I refused. We cannot use our weapons on our young," he said.
Residents in Al-Baida spoke of a bloodbath as the regime tried to cling on to power in the eastern Cyrenaica region, long a bastion of dissent.
The town's main hospital was treating a raft of gunshot casualties, among them two medics, fired on as they attempted to care for the wounded.
Foreigners told of hellish scenes in Tripoli as they fled the chaos engulfing Libya, with countries worldwide urgently trying to get their nationals out.
Thousands of foreigners packed Tripoli's airport hoping to escape the widening crisis, with those who managed to leave describing anarchic scenes, with food and water supplies running low.
Governments sent planes and ships in a bid to rescue their citizens from the mounting lawlessness as Mr Gaddafi pursues a bloody bid to cling to power.
"Libya is descending into hell," said Helena Sheehan, who made it to London Gatwick Airport on the first specially-chartered British rescue flight.
"The airport is like nothing I've ever seen in my whole life," the 66-year-old said. "It's absolute chaos. There's just thousands and thousands of people trying to get out."
Fellow passenger Jan McKeogh added: "It's usually a very, very safe area but there were absolute maniacs over there."
Others told of gunmen standing on roundabouts and getting on buses looking for mercenaries.
The logistical challenges were especially acute for Asian countries with more than 150,000 low-paid workers trapped - including some 60,000 Bangladeshis and 30,000 Filipinos.
China ramped up a massive air, sea and land operation to evacuate more than 30,000 of its citizens, with over 4,000 transferred to the nearby Greek island of Crete yesterday.
Evacuee Jill Wang, 24, a translator working for a construction firm near Benghazi, said: "We did not go outside the compound, but others who did were robbed by gangs and some got injured. We were really scared and afraid that something worse would happen."
Greek evacuee Costas Koumentakos, from Athens, said: "We had local friends, they saved us.
"We were afraid because someone could kill you without answering to no one. There is no police, it's anarchy."
Thailand, which has more than 23,000 workers in Libya, said it was making preparations to get its citizens to Malta.
India said a 1,000-capacity passenger ship had arrived to begin evacuating some of its 18,000 nationals to Egypt.
Migrante International, a support group for Philippines workers abroad, said Filipinos had been left to fend for themselves, as Vice President Jejomar Binay planned to fly to the region to review emergency plans.
A South Korean warship was on its way, while Seoul has chartered a plane to fly some of the estimated 1,400 South Koreans still in Libya to Cairo.
Hundreds of US nationals and other foreigners have boarded a US-chartered ferry in Tripoli but high seas delayed their departure for Malta.
British Prime Minister David Cameron said he was "incredibly sorry" for the delays in getting British nationals home, as the first three planes made it out, carrying adults, children and even a dog.
On Tuesday, Mr Gaddafi vowed to remain as Libya's leader, saying he would die as a martyr in the land of his ancestors and fight to the "last drop" of his blood.
The speech, in which he ordered the security forces to crush the popular uprising, sparked universal condemnation from world leaders.
US President Barack Obama described the crackdown by the regime's remaining loyalists as "outrageous".
Obama urged the world to unite to hold Libya accountable for the crackdown while British Foreign Secretary William Hague said he wanted an international investigation into the "atrocities" taking place.
But Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has warned the West against interfering in others' affairs.
A joint EU-Russia statement said the two sides "condemn and consider unacceptable the use of military force to break up peaceful demonstrations".
Calling for "national dialogue" to resolve problems "that have accumulated within societies", the joint declaration also offered economic and other assistance to Arab countries.
Asked for further comment at a press conference, Putin repeatedly urged the West to refrain from meddling in the internal affairs of other nations.
"People should have the right to determine their future and their destiny ... without any interference from outside," he said.
"We should respect processes" unravelling in other regions of the world," Putin also said. "Of course we should carefully support the phenomenon which takes place there but we should not interfere."
LIGHT CRUDE, BUT FURTHER AWAYSaudi Arabia, the world's leading oil exporter, has light crude, and senior sources said it is able to supply more to replace Libyan barrels. How much of it might be available to make the journey to Europe is unclear, however.
The kingdom has asked European refiners to specify the quantity and quality of oil they want, the Financial Times quoted a Saudi official as saying.
"There is the whole variety of different crudes available. It covers everything," said Sadad al-Husseini, an oil analyst and former top official at oil giant Saudi Aramco.
Capacity increments that have taken Saudi Arabia's overall production to 12.5 million barrels per day have included high quality light oil.
Saudi Aramco said on Monday its Khurais oilfield was pumping around 1 million bpd and could produce up to 1.4 million bpd. That alone could in theory make up for lost Libyan exports.
Some analysts say events in the Middle East and North Africa are moving so rapidly that OPEC may decide not to take any formal output decision until more clarity emerges, although Saudi Arabia can always unilaterally add crude to the market.
A defiant Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi Thursday warned of chaos if anti-government protests continued in the country and accused Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden of 'duping young people' into participating in the violent demonstrations.
In a phone-in to state TV, the embattled leader warned Libyans that protests will lead to chaos in the country, Xinhua said citing an Al Arabiya TV report.
'If you want to live in this chaos, it's up to you,' he said, adding that he felt sorry for those who got killed in the clashes.
According to BBC, Gaddafi said that young people were being duped with drugs and alcohol to take part in 'destruction and sabotage'.
In the phone call from the town of Al Zawiya, broadcast live on TV, Gaddafi said the protesters had no genuine demands and were being dictated to by the Al Qaeda leader.
The telephone call was said to be an address to the people of Al Zawiya, 50 km west of the capital, where there has been renewed gunfire reported in the streets.
'Bin Laden... this is the enemy who is manipulating people. Do not be swayed by bin Laden,' he said.
'It is obvious now that this issue is run by Al Qaeda. Those armed youngsters, our children, are incited by people who are wanted by America and the Western world.
'Those inciting are very few in numbers and we have to capture them.'
The protests against Gaddafi's 41-year rule began after mass demonstrations forced Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak to step down after 30 years in power Feb 11, and one month after demonstrators across the border in Tunisia toppled their longtime leader, Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali.
Gaddafi said that Libya was not like Egypt and Tunisia, which have seen their leaders deposed, because the people of Libya had it in their own hands to change their lives through committees.
The Libyan leader said he only has 'moral authority' in Libya. 'I don't have the power to issue laws. The authority is at the hands of the people,' he told the official TV.
He urged families to rein in their sons, saying many of the protesters were underage and beyond the reach of the law.
He also vowed that those carrying out violent protests would be put on trial.
This was Gaddafi's second live TV appearance since the protests erupted Feb 14.
On Tuesday, he said he would die a martyr in Libya and fight to the 'last drop' of his blood.
Meanwhile, opposition politicians and tribal leaders have held a key meeting in the eastern town of Al Bayda to show a united front against Gaddafi.
STEADY OUTPUT POLICY
OPEC has officially held output policy steady since December 2008 when it implemented record supply curbs totaling 4.2 million bpd.
As the oil market has risen, OPEC has unofficially increased the amount it produces above its agreed limits.
Data supplied by Saudi Arabia showed its output reached the highest in two years in December, although its exports had dipped from the previous month.
An industry source also said Saudi Arabia had large amounts of light crude, although he added Saudi Aramco had not yet issued new instructions to increase the rate of pumping.
Early this week, Saudi Aramco invited journalists to Khurais oilfield and told them it could produce up to 1.4 million bpd of light oil. For European customers, the advantage of Libya is that it is only a short journey away across the Mediterranean.
The sources said Saudi Arabia could shorten the journey time for its crudes by shipping them through its East-West pipeline and then to the Mediterranean and on to Europe.
By Stratfor Global Intelligence
Unlike energy produced in most African states, nearly all of Libya's oil and natural gas is produced onshore. This reduces development costs but increases the chances that political instability could impact output - and Libya has been anything but stable of late.
Libya's 1.8 million barrels per day (bpd) of oil output can be broken into two categories. The first comes from a basin in the country's western extreme and is exported from a single major
hub just west of Tripoli. The second basin is in the country's eastern region and is exported from a variety of facilities in eastern cities.
At the risk of oversimplifying, Libya's population is split in half: Leader Muammar Gaddafi's power base is in Tripoli in the extreme west, the opposition is concentrated in Benghazi in the east, with a 600 kilometer-wide gulf of nearly empty desert in between.
This effectively gives the country two political factions, two energy-producing basins, two oil output infrastructures. Economically at least, the seeds of protracted conflict - regardless of what happens with Gaddafi or any political changes after he departs - have already been sown.
If Libya veers toward civil war, each side will have its own source of income to feed on, as well as a similar income source on the other side to target. There have not been any attacks on the energy sector yet, but the threats to stability - overt and implied - have been sufficient to nudge most international oil firms operating in Libya to remove their staff.
These staff are essential. At 6.5 million people, Libya's tiny population simply cannot generate the mass of technocrats and engineers required to run a reasonably sized energy sector. As such, foreign firms do most of the investing and all of the heavy lifting.
The Libyans are hardly incompetent, but even if their skill sets and labor force simply were deep enough - and they are not - the political instability is keeping many workers at home. Within the past 24 hours we have seen the first reductions in output - about 100,000 bpd is now offline - and more are sure to follow.
This will be the biggest problem for Italian energy major ENI. That firm's relationship with Libya reflects Rome's, which has had influence in what is currently Libya literally since the time of the Roman Empire. ENI has had boots on the ground in the North African state since the dawn of its energy industry in 1959 and has never scaled back its operations.
Even in the dark days of Libya's ostracism from the West in the 1980s, when American firms left due to Gaddafi's backing of various militant factions and United Nations and US sanctions were levied after Libyan agents downed Pam Am Flight 103 in 1988, killing 270 people, ENI drilled on. As such, ENI produces some 250,000 bpd in Libya, which accounts for 15% of the Italian firm's global output. It is also the major power behind the country's moderate piped natural gas exports.
ENI is also a partially state-owned firm and is thus susceptible to inefficiency and a lack of propensity to rise to technical challenges. As such, ENI has simply been unable to secure new energy sources except on terms set by others. Unsurprisingly, it has seen its market share eroded by a more adept private challenger, Edison.
All told, Italy has to find about 60 billion cubic meters (bcm) of natural gas a year to cover the country's natural gas deficit. Despite the drawbacks of partnering with someone like Gaddafi, Libya can provide about 11 bcm - and ENI, fully supported by the central government in Rome, gets all of it. Italy, via ENI, is also Libya's single largest oil consumer, with most of the rest going elsewhere in Europe.
Whether ENI loses access to Libyan energy because of safety concerns, supply interruptions or a new government in Tripoli that looks less than favorably on the company that stuck by Gaddafi through thick and thin, there is much risk and little opportunity ahead in ENI's future relations with Libya.
(Published with permission from STRATFORr, a Texas-based geopolitical intelligence company. Copyright 2011 Stratfor.)
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MB24Ak02.htmlhttp://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MB24Ak02.htmlhttp://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MB24Ak02.htmlhttp://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MB24Ak02.html
Libyan chaos could threaten Mediterranean economy
FEB 22, 2011 11:00 EST
By Una Galani
The author is a Reuters Breakingviews columnist. The opinions expressed are her own.
LONDON — Chaos in Libya could pose a threat to Mediterranean economies. The unrest in the oil-rich North African country, and the subsequent bloody reaction of its authoritarian regime, could soon present a serious strategic challenge for Western governments and corporate titans that recently embraced the long-pariah state.
But it is Italy, the country's former colonial ruler, which looks set to bear the brunt of the fallout if the situation descends into uncontrolled turmoil.
Four decades of rule under unpredictable Muammar Gaddafi quite expectedly failed to deliver the Brotherly Leader and Guide of the Revolution's vision of a "state of the masses" or "people's capitalism". In one of the most corrupt countries in the world, wealth from the economy, which accounts for 2 percent of global oil production, is hardly visible among the population of 6 million.
Despite its massive failings, Libya, as other similar countries, has won praise from the International Monetary Fund. The country's relationship with Western powers deepened after U.N. sanctions against were lifted in 2003. The United States has increased its oil imports from the country, and unsavoury government dealings have helped the likes of British oil giant BP push on with a $900 million exploration contract in Libya.
The country's strongest external ties, however, remain with Italy. Libya is a prominent feature on the Italian corporate landscape, with stakes in carmaker Fiat, banking group UniCredit and even the Juventus football team. Italian oil giant Eni has a 14 billion euro investment programme in the country, as well as supply contracts stretching to 2047. Overall Libyan oil accounts for around 27 percent of Italy's consumption.
Threats from Gaddafi's son that the country's oil "will be burned" cannot be taken lightly. Even if Libya doesn't descend into all-out civil war, it can afford a prolonged period of disruption despite its economy's absolute dependence on oil production. The country's net foreign assets are estimated to total $150 billion — or enough to cover 37 months of imports.
Italy's politicians are reluctant to condemn Tripoli, but after the country's decision to open fire on anti-government protestors, companies will have to weigh the dubious attraction of counting Libya amongst their shareholders. Energy investments could also now be threatened if sanctions are re-imposed. Meanwhile the near 2 percent jump in oil prices seems to suggest markets aren't overly optimistic.
ONGC has one staffer while OIL had two in the Libyan capital Tripoli and the two state firms are making arrangements to evacuate them by month-end.
"Contact with the officer has been intermittent," ONGC Chairman and Managing Director A K Hazarika said, "We are working with External Affairs Ministry and the Indian Embassy in Libya to bring him back."
OIL has been able to deliver air-tickets to its officers of two flights out of Tripoli.
"Communication through telephone and internet is very difficult. But we have been able to speak to them and have managed to send tickets across for a couple of flights out of Tripoli tomorrow and the day-after," OIL Chairman and Managing Director N M Borah said.
Both the firms have authorised their staffers to leave Libya by whatever mean possible.
"We have (asked)our officer to be in touch with Indian Embassy in Libya," ONGC Videsh Ltd Managing Director RS Butola said.
OVL, the overseas arm of the state explorer, had three blocks in Libya - Block NC-189 in Sirte Basin, Block 81-1 in Ghadames Basin in south-west Libya and Contract Area 43 located in Cyrenaica offshore basin in the Mediterranean sea.
The company had surrendered Block NC-198 and Block 81-1 after it did not discover any hydrocarbon and was working only on Contract Area 43.
OIL is the operator of two exploration blocks in scrub desert area of Western Libya. The blocks, where Indian Oil Corp was an equal partner, had turned out to be dry and OIL had decided to relinquish them.
"We were in the process of winding up operations (when the unrest broke out in Libya)," Borah said.
OIL had, some weeks back, applied to Libyan authorities for relinquishing the two onshore blocks - Block 86 and Block 102(4) in oil-prolific Sirte Basin.
OIL was the operator of the two blocks and held 50 per cent stake in the venture, while the rest was held by state refiner IOC. OIL-IOC had won the blocks in the Libyan Exploration and Production Service Agreement (EPSA IV) Bid Round I in 2004.
The official said OIL also has interest in Area 95/96 (Block 2/1, 2 & 4) with Algerian oil firm Sonatrach. OIL and IOC hold 25 per cent stake each, while Sonatrach is the operator with 50 per cent.
The onshore block, located in the oil-prolific Ghadames Basin, was won in EPSA Bid Round IV in 2007.
Col Muammar Gaddafi: ''You should not listen to Bin Laden and his followers''
-
U.S. Role in Middle East Crisis One of Diplomacy
14 Jul 2006 ... The US role in middle east 'diplomacy' is to ensure that ...
usgovinfo.about.com/.../us-role-in-middle-east-crisis-one-of-diplomacy.htm - Cached - Similar -
FT.com / Middle East / Politics & Society - Gaddafi expects 'big ...
23 Feb 2011 ... Gaddafi expects 'big father' role in new order, says son ... country's private sector that a US official dubbed them "Gaddafi Incorporated" ...
www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bc99db2e-3f74-11e0-a1ba-00144feabdc0.html -
U.S. Military Involvement in the Middle East: Information from ...
U.S. Military Involvement in the Middle East The Middle East—defined here as the area stretching from the Persian Gulf to North Africa—has witnessed.
www.answers.com › ... › US Military History Companion - Cached - Similar -
Middle East-u.s. Relations: Information from Answers.com
Middle East-u.s. Relations The first contacts between the United States and ...
www.answers.com › ... › American History Companion - Cached - Similar -
The Middle East and the West: The U.S. Role Grows : NPR
23 Aug 2004 ... As World War II ends, the United States becomes the great outside power in the Middle East, with three main concerns: Persian Gulf oil; ...
www.npr.org › News › World › Middle East - Similar - Add to iGoogle -
Videos for US Role in middle east
Inside Story - The US role in theMiddle East
24 min - 4 May 2010
Uploaded by AlJazeeraEnglish
youtube.com
America and the Middle East
73 min - 13 Feb 2007
fora.tv
-
The Citizens: The Future US Role in the Middle East
20 Feb 2011 ... We may be seeing a new US role in the middle east emerge in which our allies are more likely to democratize relatively smoothly if slowly ...
thecitizens.blogspot.com/2011/02/future-us-role-in-middle-east.html - Cached -
U.S. Intervention in the Middle East
U.S. Intervention in the Middle East "Why do people in the Middle East hate the United States," people are asking, in the wake of the events of September 11 ...
www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6308.htm - Cached - Similar -
America & the Middle East: U.S. involvement in the Mideast goes ...
18 Apr 2003 ... America & the Middle East: U.S. involvement in the Mideast goes back 200 years. It's a complicated tale of American idealism, ...
findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BUE/is.../ai_n18615510/ - Cached - Similar -
Middle East Notes and Comment: A U.S. Role in Yemen | Center for ...
Middle East Notes and Comment: A U.S. Role in Yemen. By Jon B. Alterman. Jan 22, 2010. For the last month, Washington has been abuzz with talk about what ...
csis.org/.../middle-east-notes-and-comment-us-role-yemen - Cached - Similar
U.S. Role in Middle East Crisis One of Diplomacy
usgovinfo.about.com/.../us-role-in-middle-east-crisis-one-of-diplomacy.htm - Cached - Similar
FT.com / Middle East / Politics & Society - Gaddafi expects 'big ...
www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bc99db2e-3f74-11e0-a1ba-00144feabdc0.html
U.S. Military Involvement in the Middle East: Information from ...
www.answers.com › ... › US Military History Companion - Cached - Similar
Middle East-u.s. Relations: Information from Answers.com
www.answers.com › ... › American History Companion - Cached - Similar
The Middle East and the West: The U.S. Role Grows : NPR
www.npr.org › News › World › Middle East - Similar - Add to iGoogle
Videos for US Role in middle east
|
|
The Citizens: The Future US Role in the Middle East
thecitizens.blogspot.com/2011/02/future-us-role-in-middle-east.html - Cached
U.S. Intervention in the Middle East
www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6308.htm - Cached - Similar
America & the Middle East: U.S. involvement in the Mideast goes ...
findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BUE/is.../ai_n18615510/ - Cached - Similar
Middle East Notes and Comment: A U.S. Role in Yemen | Center for ...
csis.org/.../middle-east-notes-and-comment-us-role-yemen - Cached - Similar
Global stocks dip; oil surges amid Libyan unrest
2 Hours ago
- BoI 1st India bank to offer trade settlement in Yuan
- CM Sheila should be summoned by CBI: Kalmadi
- Maoists treated me well, says released collector
- US 'problem' banks jump to 884 in Q3: FDIC
- Auto, banking cos down over 7% on rate, fuel hike
- Banks told to stop re-circulation of soiled notes
- Oil min sets tough conditions to clear Cairn deal
- Tata Motors to list JLR on London Stock Exchange
- Virus hacks 150,000 cell phones in China
- Amar Chitra Katha creator Anant Pai dead
- Wall St cash bonuses decline to $20.8 bn in '10
- Oil prices could be game-changer for world economy
Budget 2011 likely to cater to populist pressure despite deficit24 Feb, 2011, 2104 hrs IST, REUTERSPrime Minister Manmohan Singh's embattled govt will likely boost spending on social programmes in a populist budget on Monday.
24 Feb, 2011, 2225 hrs IST, PTISSTL had applied for FIPB approval in December last year, since the nod is a pre-requisite to get a NLD license from Department of Telecom.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/
Libyan leader Col Muammar Gaddafi has told state TV that Osama Bin Laden and his followers are to blame for the protests racking his country.
In a phone call addressed to residents of the town of al-Zawiya, Col Gaddafi said young people were being duped with drugs and alcohol to take part in "destruction and sabotage".
Col Gaddafi is battling to shore up control of Tripoli and western areas.
Protesters have been consolidating gains in cities in the east.
Opposition politicians and tribal leaders have held a key meeting in the eastern town of al-Bayda to show a united front against Col Gaddafi.
'This is your country'The telephone call addressed al-Zawiya, 50km (30 miles) west of the capital, where there has been renewed gunfire reported in the streets.
Col Gaddafi said the protesters had no genuine demands and were being dictated to by the al-Qaeda leader.
"Bin Laden... this is the enemy who is manipulating people. Do not be swayed by Bin Laden," he said.
"It is obvious now that this issue is run by al-Qaeda. Those armed youngsters, our children, are incited by people who are wanted by America and the Western world.
"Those inciting are very few in numbers and we have to capture them."
He said the young protesters were "trigger happy and they shoot especially when they are stoned with drugs".
He said that Libya was not like Egypt and Tunisia, which have seen their leaders deposed, because the people of Libya had it in their own hands to change their lives through committees.
"This is your country and it is up to you how to deal with it," he said.
Calling the situation in al-Zawiya a "farce", he urged families to rein in their sons, saying many of the protesters were underage and beyond the reach of the law.
But he also vowed that those carrying out violent protests should be put on trial.
This was Col Gaddafi's second live TV appearance since the protests erupted on 15 February.
On Tuesday he said he would die a martyr in Libya and fight to the "last drop" of his blood. The latest broadcast was a lot shorter - about 20 minutes compared with 75 minutes on Tuesday.
Heavy gunfire has been reported in al-Zawiya and there are reports of a police station on fire.
One civilian leaving through the Tunisian border told Reuters: "It is chaotic there. There are people with guns and swords."
An eyewitness told Associated Press that soldiers had opened fire on protesters holed up in the city's Souq Mosque, while a doctor at a field clinic told AP he had seen 10 bodies and 150 wounded people.
Information from Libya remains difficult to verify and many reports cannot be independently confirmed.
Zuara, 120km west of Tripoli, was said to be in the hands of anti-government militias and defence committees of civilians, with no sign of police.
Fighting is reported between pro- and anti-government forces in Misrata, Libya's third-biggest city, 200km east of Tripoli.
Pro-Gaddafi forces are said to have also launched attacks in Sabratha and Sabha.
Click to play
British oil worker Bryan Richards describes scenes of 'mass hysteria' at Tripoli Airport (The amateur video accompanying this interview is purportedly recent footage of the scene in Libya)
But Tripoli, under government control, and cities in the east, held by the protesters, are generally said to be calm.
In Benghazi, protesters were building defences against a possible counterattack by pro-Gaddafi forces.
Oil prices climbOpposition tribal leaders and politicians met in al-Bayda in the east to demonstrate a united front against Col Gaddafi in one of the first signs of organisation for a bigger fight against the government.
Pictures broadcast by al-Jazeera showed delegates giving speeches in a conference hall, amid loud chants against Col Gaddafi.
Former justice minister, Mustafa Abdel-Jalil, who recently resigned in protest at the violence against anti-government demonstrators, said there would be no talks with the Libyan leader and called for him to step down immediately.
The Libyan ambassador to Jordan has now become the latest senior official to resign his post in response to the situation in his country.
The total number of deaths has been impossible to determine. Human Rights Watch says it has confirmed nearly 300 deaths, but the International Federation for Human Rights says at least 700 people have been killed, while Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said estimates of 1,000 dead were "credible".
Masses of foreigners are still struggling to leave Libya with the situation at Tripoli airport described as mayhem.
Briton Helena Sheehan, arriving back in London, said: "The airport is like nothing I've ever seen in my whole life. It's absolute chaos. There's just thousands and thousands of people trying to get out."
Oil prices have hit their highest levels in two-and-a-half years.
Brent crude hit $119.79 (£74.08) a barrel in early Thursday trade, before falling back to $115.04. Oil firms - including Total, Repsol, OMV and Wintershall - have been suspending all or part of their production in Libya this week.
Gaddafi says Bin Laden to blame
Libyan leader Col Muammar Gaddafi tells state TV that Osama Bin Laden and his followers are to blame for the protests racking his country.
Bahrain GP off after civic unrest
Iranian drama scoops Golden BearSpecial Reports
Middle East protests
News, analysis and reaction as unrest spreads throughout the region
More Special Reports:
Can Gaddafi's regime go on?
Extreme hiking on West Bank barrier
Lost in translation
Saudi nerves
Legitimacy crisis
My trip to Yemen
Well-heeled Halifaxhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12570279
American imperialism
 | This article may contain original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding references. Statements consisting only of original research may be removed. More details may be available on the talk page. (February 2011) |
American empire (American imperialism) is a term referring to the political, economic, military and cultural influence of the United States. The concept of an American Empire was first popularized in the aftermath of the Spanish–American War of 1898. The sources and proponents of this concept range from classical Marxist theorists of imperialism as a product of capitalism, to modern liberal andconservative theorists analysing U.S. foreign policy.
Contents[hide]
|
[edit]Issues concerning the concept of 'imperialism' and 'empire'
Use of the term 'imperialism' was first used in a Napoleonic context, and was also used in relation British foreign policy,[1] but its use became more widespread in the mid-19th century.[2] It was first widely applied to the US by the American Anti-Imperialist League, founded in 1898 to oppose theSpanish–American War and the subsequent post-war military occupation and brutalities committed by US forces in the Philippines.
The Oxford English Dictionary gives three definitions of imperialism:
| " | 1. An imperial system of government; the rule of an emperor, esp. when despotic or arbitrary. 2. The principle or spirit of empire; advocacy of what are held to be imperial interests. 3. Used disparagingly. 3a. In Communist writings: the imperial system or policy of the Western powers. 3b. Used conversely in some Western writings: the Imperial system or policy of the Communist powers.[3] | " |
From its founding there has been a dichotomy in American politics regarding the country's active and passive influence on other nations. On the one hand there is a strong imperialistic drive in terms of the United States' annexation of the North American continent, the development of a powerful trading system backed by a powerful merchant fleet and strong economic and cultural influences over other countries. On the other hand key American leaders have viewed with distrust "foreign entanglements" finding safety in non-interventionism.
| " | [America] goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She will commend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benign' sympathy of her example. She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force. She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit.[4] | " |
—John Quincy Adams, US House, 7/4/1821 | ||
This desire to be seen as a benign, positive influence on the world continues to the present. American leaders reject the idea of Empire as a motivation for their policy. Former U.S. President George W. Bush's Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said on April 29, 2003, "We don't seek empires. We're not imperialistic; we never have been"[5]
The anti-imperial stance is not universal. Thomas Jefferson, in the 1780s, awaited the fall of the Spanish empire: ". . . till our population can be sufficiently advanced to gain it from them piece by piece [sic]" [6][7] In turn, Leftist historian Sidney Lens notes that from its inception some[who?] in the US have used every means to try to dominate other nations.[8]
Effects labelled "cultural imperialism" occur without overt government policy. Stuart Creighton Miller posits that the public's sense of innocence about Realpolitik impairs popular recognition of US imperial conduct. The resistance to actively occupying foreign territory has led to policies of exerting influence via other means, including governing other countries via surrogates, where domestically unpopular governments survive only through U.S. support.[9]
William Jennings Bryan, Democratic Party presidential candidate in 1896, said:
| " | Imperialism is the policy of an empire, and an empire is a nation composed of different races living under varying forms of government. A republic cannot be an empire, for a republic rests upon the theory that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and colonialism violates this theory [...] Our experiment in colonialism has been unfortunate. Instead of profit it has brought loss. Instead of strength it has brought weakness. Instead of glory it has brought humiliation.[10] | " |
That same year, Mark Twain, a leader and founding member of the American Anti-Imperialist League, wrote:
| " | I have read carefully the treaty of Paris, and I have seen that we do not intend to free, but to subjugate the people of the Philippines. We have gone there to conquer, not to redeem. It should, it seems to me, be our pleasure and duty to make those people free, and let them deal with their own domestic questions in their own way. And so I am an anti-imperialist. I am opposed to having the eagle put its talons on any other land.[11] | " |
The maximum geographical extension of American direct political and military control happened in the aftermath of World War II, in the period after the surrender and occupations of Germany and Austria in May and later Japan and Korea in September 1945 and before the independence of the Philippines in July 1946.
[edit]American exceptionalism
American exceptionalism refers to the theory that the United States occupies a special niche among the nations of the world[12] in terms of its national credo, historical evolution, political and religious institutions and origins.
Stuart Creighton Miller points out that the question of U.S. imperialism has been the subject of agonizing debate ever since the United States acquired formal empire at the end of the 19th century during the 1898 Spanish-American War. Miller argues that this agony is because of United States' sense of innocence, produced by a kind of "immaculate conception" view of United States' origins. In Miller's view, when European settlers came to the United States, they saw themselves as miraculously shedding their old ways upon arrival in the New World, as one might discard old clothing, and fashioning new cultural garments based solely on experiences in a new and vastly different environment. Miller believes that school texts, patriotic media, and patriotic speeches on which Americans have been reared do not stress the origins of America's system of government, that these sources often omit or downplay that the "United States Constitution owes its structure as much to the ideas of John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseauand Thomas Hobbes as to the experiences of the Founding Fathers; that Jeffersonian thought to a great extent paraphrases the ideas of earlier Scottish philosophers; and that even the unique frontier egalitarian has deep roots in seventeenth century English radical traditions."[13]
Philosopher Douglas Kellner traces the identification of American exceptionalism as a distinct phenomenon back to 19th century French observer Alexis de Tocqueville, who concluded by agreeing that the U.S., uniquely, was "proceeding along a path to which no limit can be perceived."[14]
American exceptionalism is popular among people within the U.S.,[15] but its validity and its consequences are disputed. Miller argues that U.S. citizens fall within three schools of thought about the question whether the United States is imperialistic:
- Americans who find it difficult to come to grips with social flaws associated with the "Old World", such as militarism, imperialism, inequality, and misuse of power;
- Highly patriotic Americans who deny such abuses and even assert that they could never exist in America;
- Overly self-critical Americans who tend to exaggerate the nation's flaws and fail to place them in historical or worldwide contexts.[16]
As a Monthly Review editorial opines on the phenomenon, "in Britain, empire was justified as a benevolent 'white man's burden'. And in the United States, empire does not even exist; 'we' are merely protecting the causes of freedom, democracy, and justice worldwide."[17]
[edit]Viewpoints of American imperialism
[edit]Imperialism at the heart of U.S. foreign policy
Many Marxists, anarchists, members of the New Left, as well as some conservatives, tend to view U.S. imperialism as both deep-rooted and amoral. Imperialism as U.S. policy, in the view of historians like William Appleman Williams, Howard Zinn, and Gabriel Kolko, traces its beginning not to the Spanish–American War, but to Jefferson's purchase of the Louisiana Territory, or even to the displacement of Native Americans prior to the American Revolution, and continues to this day. Historian Sidney Lens argues that "the United States, from the time it gained its own independence, has used every available means – political, economic, and military – to dominate other nations."[18] Numerous U.S. foreign interventions, ranging from early actions under the Monroe Doctrine to 21st-century interventions in the Middle East, are typically described by these authors as imperialistic. Linguist and political activist Noam Chomsky ties the imperialistic ambitions of the US to its origin of what he calls "American Empire". He quotes some of the founding fathers of the USA to highlight this idea :
"Benjamin Franklin, 25 years before the Revolution, complained that the British were imposing limits on the expansion of the colonies. He objected to this, borrowing from Machiavelli. He admonished the British (I'm quoting him), 'A prince that acquires new territories and removes the natives to give his people room will be remembered as the father of the nation.' And George Washington agreed. He wanted to be the father of the nation."[19]
Historian D.W. Meinig argues at length for the use of the words "empire" and "imperial" for the United States, rooted as early as theLouisiana Purchase which he describes as an "imperial acquisition – imperial in the sense of the aggressive encroachment of one people upon the territory of another, resulting in the subjugation of that people to alien rule. The Louisianans were suddenly annexed to the United States without the slightest gesture of interest on the part of either America or France as to how they might feel about it... Louisiana therefore became an unexpected experiment in empire... It began to give the word empire another and not altogether comfortable connotation for America: not just a theoretical term... but an America that included a bloc of captive peoples of foreign culture who had not chosen to be Americans." He also argues that U.S. policy toward Native American Indians was blatantly imperialistic, especially theIndian Removals under which entire peoples were moved to "specified reserves in an entirely different part of the empire" and resettled "under a program designed to remold them into a people more appropriately conformed to imperial desires." Another example given is the military occupation and reconstruction of the American South following the Civil War.[20]
The conservative critique of U.S. imperialism has been identified with historians such as Charles Beard and Andrew Bacevich, part of a tradition of non-interventionism, often referred to derogatorily, if inaccurately, as "isolationism". While Beard believed that American policy had been driven by self-interested expansionism as far back as the writing of the Constitution, many conservative critics of imperialism have a more positive view of America's early era. Writer and politician Patrick Buchanan argues that the modern United States' drive to empire is "far from what the Founding Fathers had intended the young Republic to become."[21] A conservative anti-imperialism is defended both by some on the Old Right, such as Buchanan, and by libertarians such as Justin Raimondo and Ron Paul.
For both leftists and conservatives, a critical historical view is typically continued to present U.S. foreign policy. Bacevich argues that the U.S. did not fundamentally change its foreign policy after the Cold War, and remains focused on an effort to expand its control across the world.[22] As the surviving superpower at the end of the Cold War, the U.S. could focus its assets in new directions, the future being "up for grabs" according to former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Paul Wolfowitz in 1991.[23] Marxist sociologist John Bellamy Fosterargues, in fact, that the United States' sole-superpower status makes it now the most dangerous world imperialist.[24]
Lens describes American exceptionalism as a myth, which allows any number of "excesses and cruelties, though sometimes admitted, usually [to be] regarded as momentary aberrations."[25] Chomsky argues, like many, that exceptionalism and the denials of imperialism are the result of a systematic strategy of propaganda, to "manufacture opinion" as the process has long been described in other countries.[26] "Domination of the media", according to Chomsky, allows an elite to "fix the premises of discourse and interpretation, and the definition of what is newsworthy in the first place."[27]
[edit]Ideological views and theories of the American Imperialism
Although writers of various schools may describe many of the same policies and institutions as imperialistic, explanations for alleged U.S. imperialism vary widely. Journalist Ashley Smith divides theories of the U.S. imperialism into 5 broad categories: (1) "liberal" theories, (2) "social-democratic" theories, (3) "Leninist" theories, (4) theories of "super-imperialism", and (5) "Hardt-and-Negri-ite" theories.[28]
[edit]Liberal
A "liberal" theory asserts that imperial policies are the products of particular elected politicians (e.g. James K. Polk)[29] or political movements (e.g. neo-conservatism: theBush Doctrine and other recent controversies).[30][31][32][33] It holds that these policies are not the natural result of U.S. political or economic structures, and are hostile and inimical to true U.S. interests and values. This is the original position of Mark Twain and the Anti-Imperialist League and is held today by a number of Democrats, who criticize the claimed imperialism and propose the election of officials opposed to it as a solution, notablyRamsey Clark among others.
[edit]Social-democratic
A "social-democratic" theory asserts that imperialistic U.S. policies are the products of the excessive influence of certain sectors of U.S. business and government – the arms industry in alliance with military and political bureaucracies and sometimes other industries such as oil and finance, a combination often referred to as the "military-industrial complex". The complex is said to benefit from war profiteering and the looting of natural resources, often at the expense of the public interest.[34] The proposed solution is typically unceasing popular vigilance in order to apply counter-pressure.[35] The left-leaning Johnson holds a version of this view; other versions are typically held by conservative anti-interventionists, such as Beard, Bacevich, Buchanan, Raimondo, and, most notably, journalist John T. Flynn and Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler who wrote:
| " | I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.[36] | " |
Alfred T. Mahan, who served as an officer in the U.S. Navy during the late 19th century, supported the notion of American imperialism in his 1890 book titled The Influence of Sea Power Upon History. In chapter one Mahan argued that modern industrial nations must secure foreign markets for the purpose of exchanging goods and, consequently, they must maintain a maritime force that is capable of protecting these trade routes.[37] Mahan's argument provides a context that also justifies imperialism by industrial nations such as the United States.
[edit]Marxist–Leninist
A "Marxist–Leninist" theory asserts that imperialistic U.S. policies are the products of the unified interest of the predominant sectors of U.S. business, which need to ensure and manipulate export markets for both goods and capital.[38] The Marxist–Leninist theory of imperialism explains that as a capitalist economy expands, business is threatened by falling profits, especially in the financial sector. After waves of mergers and concentration of ownership, business invests in overseas markets, and then will seek to the use the power of the state to protect those markets with military support. The influence of capitalist business on the government leads to international military competition as an extension of international economic competition, both driven by the inherently expansionist and crisis-prone nature of capitalism. This flow of causation from falling business profits to a world empire is quite simplistic, but reflects economic conditions in America leading up to its takeover of the Philippines.[39] Communists believe that the inevitable outcome of imperialism isrevolutionary social and economic change. The theory was first systematized during the World War I by Russian Bolsheviks Vladimir Lenin and Nikolai Bukharin, although their work was based on that of earlier Marxists, socialists, and anarchists.[38]
[edit]Super-imperialist
A theory of "super-imperialism" asserts that imperialistic U.S. policies are driven not simply by the interests of American businesses, but by the interests of the economic elites of a global alliance of developed countries. Capitalism in Europe, the U.S., and Japan has become too entangled, in this view, to permit military or geopolitical conflict between these countries, and the central conflict in modern imperialism is between the global core and the global periphery rather than between imperialist powers. Political scientists Leo Panitchand Samuel Gindin hold versions of this view.[40][41][42][43] Lenin argued this view was wishful thinking.[44]
[edit]"Empire"
The "Empire" theory is closely related to the theory of "super-imperialism", but has a different conception of power. According to political theorists Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, the world has passed the era of imperialism and entered a new era. They no longer hold that the world has already entered the new era of Empire, but only that it is emerging. According to Hardt, the Iraq War is a classically imperialist war, but represents the last gasp of a doomed strategy.[45] This new era still has colonizing power, but it has moved from national military forces based on an economy of physical goods to networked biopower based on an informational and affective economy. On this view, the U.S. is central to the development and constitution of a new global regime of international power and sovereignty, termed "Empire", but the "Empire" is decentralized and global, and not ruled by one sovereign state; "the United States does indeed occupy a privileged position in Empire, but this privilege derives not from its similarities to the old European imperialist powers, but from its differences."[46] Hardt and Negri draw on the theories of Spinoza, Foucault, Deleuze, and Italian autonomist marxists.[47][48] Many in the traditions of postcolonialism, postmodernism and globalization theory hold related views.
[edit]The "New" Imperialism
In contradistinction to Hardt and Negri, Marxist anthropologist David Harvey posits there has emerged a qualitatively 'new' type of imperialism. Harvey argues that due mainly to geographical distinctions as well as uneven levels of development,[49] there has emerged three new global economic and politics blocs: the United States, the European Union, and East Asia centered around China andJapan.[50] As a result there are significant geostrategic tensions between the three major blocs over resources and economic power. Harvey posits that the US invasion of Iraq was mainly for control over oil in order to prevent rivals from attaining the resource.[51]Furthermore, Harvey argues there can arise conflict within the major blocs between capitalists and politicians due to their, at times, opposing economic interests: capitalists are interested in profit, regardless of the location or the methods of how it is attained.[52]Politicians, on the other hand, live in geographically fixed locations and are, in the US and Europe, accountable to the electorate. The 'new' imperialism, then, has led to a alignment of the interests of capitalists and politicians in order to prevent the rise and expansion of possible economic and political rivals from challenging America's dominance.[53]
[edit]U.S. military bases abroad as a form of empire
Chalmers Johnson argues that America's version of the colony is the military base.[54] Chip Pitts argues similarly that enduring U.S. bases in Iraq suggest a vision of "Iraq as a colony".[55] In this context, certain historians[who?] of the British Empire have emphasized that, prior to 1850, official government policy was generally in favour of acquiring military (especially naval) bases overseas but opposed to the government-backed acquisition of new colonial territories. It is seldom doubted, however, that British policy pre-1850 was nevertheless essentially imperial in nature.[56]
While territories such as Guam, the United States Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, and Puerto Rico remain under U.S. control, the U.S. allowed many of its overseas territories or occupations to gain independence after World War II. Examples include the Philippines (1946), the Federated States of Micronesia (1986), Marshall Islands (1986), and Palau (1994). However most of those former possessions continue to have U.S. bases within their territories. In the case of Okinawa, which came under US administration after the battle of Okinawa during World War II, this happened despite local popular opinion.[57] As of 2003, the United States had bases in over 36 countries worldwide.[58]
[edit]Benevolent imperialism
Military historian Max Boot defends U.S. imperialism of past eras:
| " | U.S. imperialism has been the greatest force for good in the world during the past century. It has defeated communism and Nazism and has intervened against the Taliban and Serbian ethnic cleansing. It has also helped spread liberal institutions to countries as diverse as South Korea and Panama.[59] | " |
Boot argues that the United States altruistically went to war with Spain to liberate Cubans, Puerto Ricans, and Filipinos from their tyrannical yoke. If U.S. troops lingered on too long in the Philippines, it was to protect the Filipinos from European predators waiting in the wings for American withdrawal and to tutor them in American-style democracy. In the Philippines, the U.S. followed its usual pattern:
| " | The United States would set up a constabulary, a quasi-military police force led by Americans and made up of local enlisted men. Then the Americans would work with local officials to administer a variety of public services, from vaccinations and schools to tax collection. American officials, though often resented, usually proved more efficient and less venal than their native predecessors... Holding fair elections became a top priority because once a democratically elected government was installed, the Americans felt they could withdraw.[60] | " |
Boot argues that this was far from "the old-fashioned imperialism bent on looting nations of their natural resources." Just as with Iraq and Afghanistan, "some of the poorest countries on the planet", in the early 20th century:
| " | The United States was least likely to intervene in those nations (such as Argentina and Costa Rica) where American investors held the biggest stakes. The longest occupations were undertaken in precisely those countries – Nicaragua, Haiti, the Dominican Republic – where the United States had the smallest economic stakes... Unlike the Dutch in the East Indies, the British in Malaya, or the French in Indochina, the Americans left virtually no legacy of economic exploitation.[60] | " |
Boot willingly uses the term "imperialism" to describe United States policy, not only in the early 20th century but "since at least 1803".[60]This marks a difference in terminology rather than a difference of fundamental historical interpretation from observers who deny that the U.S. has ever been an empire, since Boot still argues that U.S. foreign policy has been consistently benevolent.[59] Boot is not alone; as columnist Charles Krauthammer puts it, "People are now coming out of the closet on the word 'empire.'" This embrace of empire is made by many neoconservatives, including British historian Paul Johnson, and writers Dinesh D'Souza and Mark Steyn. It is also made by some liberal hawks, such as political scientist Zbigniew Brzezinski, and Michael Ignatieff.[61]
For instance, British historian Niall Ferguson argues that the United States is an empire, but believes that this is a good thing. Ferguson has drawn parallels between the British Empire and the imperial role of the United States in the late 20th century and early 21st century, though he describes the United States' political and social structures as more like those of the Roman Empire than of the British. Ferguson argues that all these empires have had both positive and negative aspects, but that the positive aspects of the U.S. empire will, if it learns from history and its mistakes, greatly outweigh its negative aspects.[62]
[edit]American imperialism as an aberration
Another point of view believes United States expansion overseas has been imperialistic, but sees this imperialism as a temporary phenomenon, a corruption of American ideals or the relic of a past historical era. Historian Samuel Flagg Bemis argues that Spanish–American War expansionism was a short-lived imperialistic impulse and "a great aberration in American history", a very different form of territorial growth than that of earlier American history.[63] Historian Walter LaFeber sees the Spanish–American War expansionism not as an aberration, but as a culmination of United States expansion westward.[64] But both agree that the end of the occupation of the Philippines marked the end of US empire, hence denying that present United States foreign policy is imperialistic.
The United States Information Agency writes:
| " | With the exception of the purchase of Alaska from Russia in 1867, American territory had remained fixed since 1848. In the 1890s a new spirit of expansion took hold... Yet Americans, who had themselves thrown off the shackles of empire, were not comfortable with administering one. In 1902 American troops left Cuba... The Philippines obtained... complete independence in 1946. Puerto Rico became a self-governing commonwealth... and Hawaii became a state in 1959.[65] | " |
Historian Victor Davis Hanson argues that the US does not pursue world domination, but maintains worldwide influence by a system of mutually beneficial exchanges:
| " | If we really are imperial, we rule over a very funny sort of empire... The United States hasn't annexed anyone's soil since the Spanish-American War... Imperial powers order and subjects obey. But in our case, we offer the Turks strategic guarantees, political support – and money... Isolationism, parochialism, and self-absorption are far stronger in the American character than desire for overseas adventurism.[66] | " |
Liberal internationalists argue that even though the present world order is dominated by the United States, the form taken by that dominance is not imperial. International relations scholar John Ikenberry argues that international institutions have taken the place of empire;
| " | the United States has pursued imperial policies, especially toward weak countries in the periphery. But U.S. relations with Europe, Japan, China, and Russia cannot be described as imperial... the use or threat of force is unthinkable. Their economies are deeply interwoven... they form a political order built on bargains, diffuse reciprocity, and an array of intergovernmental institutions and ad hoc working relationships. This is not empire; it is a U.S.-led democratic political order that has no name or historical antecedent.[67] | " |
International relations scholar Joseph Nye argues that US power is more and more based on "soft power", which comes from cultural hegemony rather than raw military or economic force.[68] This includes such factors as the widespread desire to emigrate to the United States, the prestige and corresponding high proportion of foreign students at US universities, and the spread of US styles of popular music and cinema. Thus the US, no matter how hegemonic, can no longer be considered to be an 'empire' in the classic sense of the term.
[edit]Factors unique to the "Age of imperialism"
 | This article is in a list format that may be better presented using prose. You can help by converting this article to prose, if appropriate. Editing help is available. (December 2008) |
A variety of factors may have coincided during the "Age of Imperialism" in the late 19th century, when the United States and the other major powers rapidly expanded their territorial possessions. Some of these are explained, or used as examples for the various forms of American imperialism.
- The industry and agriculture of the United States had grown beyond its need for consumption. Powerful business and political figures such as James G. Blaine believed that foreign markets were essential to further economic growth, promoting a more aggressive foreign policy.
- Many of the United States' peer competitors (e.g. the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, and Portugal) were engaged in imperialistic adventures, and the US felt that in order to be a "great power" among "great powers," it had to behave in a manner similar to its peers.
- The prevalence of racism, notably Ernst Haeckel's "biogenic law," John Fiske's conception of Anglo-Saxon racial superiority, andJosiah Strong's call to "civilize and Christianize" – all manifestations of a growing Social Darwinism and racism in some schools of American political thought.[69]
- The development of Frederick Jackson Turner's "Frontier Thesis", which stated that the American frontier was the wellspring of its creativity and virility as a civilization. As the Western United States was gradually becoming less of a frontier and more of a part of America, many believed that overseas expansion was vital to maintaining the American spirit.
- The publication of Alfred T. Mahan's The Influence of Sea Power upon History in 1890, which advocated three factors crucial to the United States' ascension to the position of "world power": the construction of a canal in South America, which later influenced decision-makers to construct the Panama Canal, expansion of the U.S. naval power, and the establishment of a trade/military post in the Pacific, so as to stimulate trade with China. This publication had a strong influence on the idea that a strong navy stimulated trade, and influenced policy makers such as Theodore Roosevelt and other proponents of a large navy.
- Early in his career, as Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Roosevelt was instrumental in preparing the Navy for the Spanish-American War[70] and was an enthusiastic proponent of testing the U.S. military in battle, at one point stating "I should welcome almost any war, for I think this country needs one".[71][72][73]
[edit]Debate over the nature of American foreign policy
Some scholars, however, defend the historical role of the U.S. against allegations of imperialism.[74] Other prominent political figures, such as former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, for example, have argued that "[The U.S. does not] seek empires. We're not imperialistic. We never have been."[75] Stuart Creighton Miller, however, stated in 1982 that this interpretation was no longer heard very often by historians.[76]
Historians Archibald Paton Thorton and Stuart Creighton Miller argue against the very coherence of the concept. Miller argues that the overuse and abuse of the term imperialism makes it nearly meaningless as an analytical concept.[77] Thorton wrote that "[...]imperialism is more often the name of the emotion that reacts to a series of events than a definition of the events themselves. Where colonization finds analysts and analogies, imperialism must contend with crusaders for and against."[78] Political theorist Michael Walzer argues that the term "hegemony" is better than "empire" to describe the US's role in the world,[79] a standpoint shared by political scientists such asRobert Keohane, for whom a "[...]balanced and nuanced analysis is not aided, however, by the use of the phrase 'empire' to describe United States hegemony, since 'empire' obscures rather than illuminates the differences in form of rule between the United States and other Great Powers, such as Great Britain in the nineteenth century or the Soviet Union in the twentieth."[80]
Other political scientists, such as Daniel Nexon and Thomas Wright, argue that neither term exclusively describes US foreign relations. The US can be, and has been, simultaneously an empire and a hegemonic power. They claim, however, that the general trend in US foreign relations has been away from imperial modes of control.
| " | "The heyday of American formal imperial control extended from its period of westward expansion through the aftermath of the Spanish-American war. The apogee of American informal imperial relations spanned from the post-World War II occupations of significant portions of Western Europe and East Asia through the early decades of the Cold War during which time the United States restructured the domestic and foreign-policy orientations of large portions of Europe and East Asia."[81] | " |
[edit]Cultural imperialism
The controversy regarding the issue of U.S. cultural imperialism is largely separate from the debate about U.S. military imperialism; however, some critics of imperialism argue that the two concepts are interdependent. Edward Said, one of the founders of post-colonial theory, argues that,
| " | [...], so influential has been the discourse insisting on American specialness, altruism and opportunity, that imperialism in the United States as a word or ideology has turned up only rarely and recently in accounts of the United States culture, politics and history. But the connection between imperial politics and culture in North America, and in particular in the United States, is astonishingly direct.[82] | " |
He believes non-U.S. citizens, particularly non-Westerners, are usually thought of within the U.S. in a tacitly racist manner, in a way that allows imperialism to be justified through such ideas as the White Man's Burden.[82]
Scholars who disagree with the theory of U.S. cultural imperialism or the theory of cultural imperialism in general argue that what is regarded as cultural imperialism by many is not connected to any kind of military domination, which has been the traditional means of empire. International relations scholar David Rothkop argues that cultural imperialism is the innocent result of globalization, which allows access to numerous U.S. and Western ideas and products that many non-U.S. and non-Western consumers across the world voluntarily choose to consume. A worldwide fascination with the United States has not been forced on anyone in ways similar to what is traditionally described as an empire, differentiating it from the actions of the British Empire – see the Opium Wars – and other more easily identified empires throughout history. Rothkop identifies the desire to preserve the "purity" of one's culture as xenophobic.[83] Matthew Fraser has a similar analysis, but argues further that the global cultural influence of the U.S. is a good thing.[84]
[edit]See also
- American Century
- American exceptionalism
- Americanization
- American (word)
- Anglosphere
- Anti-Americanism
- Anti-imperialism
- Bush Doctrine
- Carter Doctrine
- Chalmers Johnson
- Confessions of an Economic Hit Man
- Covert United States foreign regime change actions
- Criticism of U.S. foreign policy
- Empire lite
- Eurosphere
- Evil empire
- Foreign Military Sales
- Foreign policy of the United States
- 51st state
- Hyperpower
- Inverted totalitarianism
- Latin America – United States relations
- Manifest Destiny
- Military history of the United States
- Monroe Doctrine
- Neocolonialism
- Neoconservatism
- Oil imperialism theories
- Overseas expansion of the United States
- Overseas interventions of the United States
- Project for a New American Century
- United States Agency for International Development
- United States and state terrorism
- United States Foreign Military Financing
- United States military aid
- Soviet Empire
- Superpower
- Territorial changes of the United States
- Timeline of United States military operations
- Truman Doctrine
- War on Terrorism
- Wolfowitz Doctrine
[edit]Notes and references
- ^ Imperialism, Online Etymology Dictionary
- ^ Oxford English Dictionary (1989). "imperialism". Retrieved 2006-04-12.(subscription required)
- ^ Oxford English Dictionary (1989). "empire". Retrieved 2006-04-12.(subscription required)
- ^ John Quincy Adams Address on U.S. Foreign Policy, July 4, 1821, presidentialrhetoric.com.
- ^ Niall Ferguson, Colossus: The Rise and Fall of the American Empire, retrieved 2010-07-11
- ^ LaFeber, Walter, Inevitable Revolutions: The United States in Central America (1993) 2nd edition, p.19
- ^ Max Boot (May 6, 2003). American Imperialism? No Need to Run Away from Label. Council on Foreign Relations OP-Ed, quoting USA Today. Retrieved 2008-01-06.
- ^ Lens & Zinn 2003, p. Back cover
- ^ Johnson, Chalmers, Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire (2000), pp.72–9
- ^ Robert McHenry (October 29, 2008). "The '08 Campaign, Part II (1908, that is)". britannica.com. Retrieved 2008-11-11.
- ^ Mark Twain (October 15, 1900). letter to the editor. New York Herald.
- ^ Frederick Jackson Turner, "Significance of the Frontier", sagehistory.net (archived from the original on 2008-05-21).
- ^ Miller (1982), op. cit. p. 1.
- ^ Kellner, Douglas (2003-04-25). "American Exceptionalism". Archived from the original on February 17, 2006. Retrieved 2006-02-20.
- ^ Edwords, Frederick (November/December 1987). "The religious character of American patriotism. It's time to recognize our traditions and answer some hard questions.". The Humanist(p. 20-24, 36).
- ^ Miller (1982), op. cit. p. 1-2.
- ^ Magdoff, Harry; John Bellamy Foster (November 2001). "After the Attack...The War on Terrorism". Monthly Review 53 (6): 7. Retrieved 2009-10-08.
- ^ Lens, Sidney (2003). The Forging of the American Empire. Haymarket Books and Pluto Press. ISBN 0-7453-2100-3. Book jacket.
- ^ chomsky, Noam (April 24, 2008). Modern-Day American Imperialism: Middle East and Beyond. Boston University Publishing.
- ^ Meinig, D.W. (1993). The Shaping of America: A Geographical Perspective on 500 Years of History, Volume 2: Continental America, 1800-1867. Yale University Press. pp. 22–23, 170–196, 516–517. ISBN 0-300-05658-3.
- ^ Buchanan, Patrick (1999). A Republic, Not and Empire. Regnery Publishing. ISBN 0-89526-272-X. p. 165.
- ^ Bacevich, Andrew (2004). American Empire: The Realities and Consequences of U.S. Diplomacy. Harvard University Press.ISBN 0-674-01375-1.
- ^ ERIC SCHMITT, "Washington at Work; Ex-Cold Warrior Sees the Future as 'Up for Grabs'" The New York Times December 23, 1991.
- ^ Foster, John Bellamy (July–August 2003). "The New Age of Imperialism". Monthly Review. Retrieved 2009-10-08.
- ^ Lens (2003), op. cit. Book jacket.
- ^ Edward Hallett Carr, The Twenty Years' Crisis 1919-1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations, 1939.
- ^ Chomsky, Noam (1988). Manufacturing Consent. Pantheon Books. ISBN 0-375-71449-9. Retrieved 2009-10-08.
- ^ Smith, Ashley (June 24, 2006). "The Classical Marxist Theory of Imperialism". Socialism 2006. Columbia University.
- ^ who threatened war with Britain and caused the Mexican–American War by annexing Texas and all its territory disputed withMexico
- ^ CNN: Putin accuses U.S. of orchestrating Georgian war, September 12, 2008
- ^ CNN: Bolivian president calls for ouster of U.S. ambassador, September 12, 2008
- ^ CNN: Venezuela to expel US ambassador over coup plot, September 12, 2008
- ^ TIME: U.S. Ambassador Patrick Duddy given 72 hours to leave Venezuela, September 12, 2008
- ^ C. Wright Mills, The Causes of World War Three, Simon and Schuster, 1958, pp. 52, 111
- ^ Flynn, John T. (1944) As We Go Marching.
- ^ Smedley Butler, Wikiquote.
- ^ Alfred Thayer Mahan (1987). The influence of sea power upon history, 1660-1783. Courier Dover Publications.ISBN 9780486255095.
- ^ a b Lenin, Vladimir (1916) Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism
- ^ "Is there any man, is there any woman, let me say any child here that does not know that the seed of war in the modern world is industrial and commercial rivalry?" – Woodrow Wilson, September 11, 1919, St. Louis.The Papers of Woodrow Wilson, Arthur S. Link, ed. (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1990), vol. 63, pp. 45–46.
- ^ Leo Panitch, "What you need to know about May Day"
- ^ Leo Panitch, "Whose Violence? Imperial State Security and the Global Justice Movement" Jan, 2005
- ^ Leo Panitch, "Putting the U.S. Economic Crisis in Perspective" Jan. 31, 2008
- ^ Leo Panitch and Sam Gindin, "The Current Crisis: A Socialist Perspective" Sept. 30, 2008
- ^ BRIAN JONES, "Imperialism, The Highest Stage of Capitalism"International Socialist Review Issue 44, November–December 2005
- ^ Hardt, Michael (July 13, 2006). "From Imperialism to Empire".The Nation. Retrieved 2009-10-08.
- ^ Negri, Antonio; Hardt, Michael (2000). Empire. Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-00671-2. Retrieved 2009-10-08. p. xiii-xiv.
- ^ Michael Hardt, Gilles Deleuze: an Apprenticeship in Philosophy, ISBN 0-8166-2161-6
- ^ Autonomist_marxism#Italian_autonomism
- ^ Harvey, David (2005). The new imperialism. Oxford University Press. p. 101. ISBN 978-0-19-927808-4.
- ^ Op. cit. Harvey 2005, p. 31.
- ^ Op. cit.Harvey 2005, pp. 77–78.
- ^ Op. cit. Harvey 2005, p. 187.
- ^ Harvey 2005, pp. 76–78
- ^ America's Empire of Bases
- ^ Pitts, Chip (November 8, 2006). "The Election on Empire". The National Interest. Retrieved 2009-10-08.
- ^ See, for example, Bernard Porter The Lion's Share
- ^ Patrick Smith, Pay Attention to Okinawans and Close the U.S. Bases, International Herald Tribune (Opinion section), March 6, 1998.
- ^ "Base Structure Report" (PDF). USA Department of Defense. 2003. Retrieved 2007-01-23.
- ^ a b Boot, Max (May 6, 2003). "American Imperialism? No Need to Run Away From the Label". USA Today. Retrieved 2009-10-08.
- ^ a b c Boot, Max (November 2003). "Neither New nor Nefarious: The Liberal Empire Strikes Back". Current History 102 (667). Retrieved 2009-10-08.[copyright violation?]
- ^ Heer, Jeet (March 23, 2003). "Operation Anglosphere". Boston Globe. Retrieved 2009-10-08.
- ^ Ferguson, Niall (June 2, 2005). Colossus: The Rise and Fall of the American Empire. Penguin. ISBN 0-14-101700-7.
- ^ Miller (1982), op. cit. p. 3.
- ^ Lafeber, Walter (1975). The New Empire: An Interpretation of American Expansion, 1860-1898. Cornell University Press.ISBN 0-8014-9048-0.
- ^ ed. George Clack (September 1997). "A brief history of the United States". A Portrait of the USA. United States Information Agency. Retrieved 2010-01-12.
- ^ Hanson, Victor Davis (November 2002). "A Funny Sort of Empire". National Review. Retrieved 2009-10-08.
- ^ Ikenberry, G. John (March/April 2004). "Illusions of Empire: Defining the New American Order". Foreign Affairs.
- ^ Cf. Nye, Joseph Jr. 2005. Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. Public Affairs. 208 pp.
- ^ Thomas Friedman, "The Lexus and the Olive Tree", p. 381, and Manfred Steger, "Globalism: The New Market Ideology," and Jeff Faux, "Flat Note from the Pied Piper of Globalization," Dissent, Fall 2005, pp. 64-67.
- ^ Brands, Henry William. (1997). T.R.: The Last Romantic. New York: Basic Books. Reprinted 2001, full biography OCLC 36954615, ch 12
- ^ "April 16, 1897: T. Roosevelt Appointed Assistant Secretary of the Navy". Crucible of Empire – Timeline. PBS Online. Retrieved 2007-07-26.
- ^ "Transcript For "Crucible Of Empire"". Crucible of Empire – Timeline. PBS Online. Retrieved 2007-07-26.
- ^ Tilchin, William N. Theodore Roosevelt and the British Empire: A Study in Presidential Statecraft (1997)
- ^ See, for instance, Michael Mann (2005), Incoherent Empire(Verso); Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. (2005), "The American Empire? Not so fast", World Policy, Volume XXII, No 1, Spring;
- ^ Bookman, Jay (June 25, 2003). "Let's just say it's not an empire". Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Retrieved 2009-10-08.
- ^ Miller (1982), op. cit. p. 136.
- ^ Miller, Stuart Creighton (1982). "Benevolent Assimilation" The American Conquest of the Philippines, 1899-1903. Yale University Press. ISBN 0-300-02697-8. p. 3.
- ^ Thornton, Archibald Paton (September 1978). Imperialism in the Twentieth Century. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 0-333-24848-1.
- ^ Walzer, Michael. "Is There an American Empire?".www.freeindiamedia.com. Archived from the original on 2006-10-21. Retrieved 2006-06-10.
- ^ Keohane, Robert O. "The United States and the Postwar Order: Empire or Hegemony?" (Review of Geir Lundestad, The American Empire) Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 28, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), p. 435
- ^ Nexon, Daniel and Wright, Thomas "What's at Stake in the American Empire Debate" American Political Science Review, Vol. 101, No. 2 (May, 2007), p. 266-267
- ^ a b Said, Edward. Culture and Imperialism, speech at York University, Toronto, February 10, 1993. (archived from the original on 2007-10-13).
- ^ Rothkop, David (June 22, 1997). "Globalization and Culture"( – Scholar search). Foreign Policy. Archived from the originalon 2008-08-22.[dead link]
- ^ Fraser, Matthew (2005). Weapons of Mass Distraction: Soft Power and American Empire. St. Martin's Press.
[edit]Further reading
 | Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: American Imperialism |
| | Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: American benevolence |
- Bacevich, Andrew (2008). The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism. Macmillan. ISBN 0-8050-8815-6.
- Boot, Max (2002). The Savage Wars of Peace: Small Wars and the Rise of American Power. Basic Books. ISBN 0-465-00721-X.
- Brown, Seyom (1994). Faces of Power: Constancy and Change in United States Foreign Policy from Truman to Clinton. New York: Columbia University Press. ISBN 0-231-09669-0.
- Buchanan, Patrick (1999). A Republic, Not an Empire: Reclaiming America's Destiny. Regnery Pub. ISBN 0-89526-272-X.
- Burton, David H. (1968). Theodore Roosevelt: Confident Imperialist. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.ASIN B0007GMSSY.
- Callahan, Patrick (2003). Logics of American Foreign Policy: Theories of America's World Role. New York: Longman. ISBN 0-321-08848-4.
- Card, Orson Scott (2006). Empire. TOR. ISBN 0-7653-1611-0.
- Daalder, Ivo H.; James M. Lindsay (2003). America Unbound: The Bush Revolution in Foreign Policy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution. ISBN 0-8157-1688-5.
- Field, James A., Jr. (June 1978). "American Imperialism: The Worst Chapter in Almost Any Book". The American Historical Review83 (3): 659. doi:10.2307/1861842.
- Fulbright, J. William; Seth P. Tillman (1989). The Price of Empire. Pantheon Books. ISBN 0-394-57224-6.
- Gaddis, John Lewis (2005). Strategies of Containment: A Critical Appraisal of Postwar American National Security Policy (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-517447-X.
- Hardt, Michael; Antonio Negri (2001). Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-00671-2. online
- Huntington, Samuel P. (1996). The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 0-684-81164-2.
- Johnson, Chalmers (2000). Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire. New York: Holt. ISBN 0-8050-6239-4.
- Johnson, Chalmers (2004). The Sorrows of Empire: Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic. New York: Metropolitan Books.ISBN 0-8050-7004-4.
- Johnson, Chalmers (2007). Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic. New York, NY: Metropolitan Books. ISBN 0-8050-7911-4.
- Kagan, Robert (2003). Of Paradise and Power: America and Europe in the New World Order. New York: Knopf. ISBN 1-4000-4093-0.
- Kerry, Richard J. (1990). The Star-Spangled Mirror: America's Image of Itself and the World. Savage, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.ISBN 0-8476-7649-8.
- Lens, Sidney; Zinn, Howard (2003). The Forging of the American Empire: From the Revolution to Vietnam: A History of American Imperialism. Plkuto press. ISBN 0-7453-2100-3.
- Lundestad, Geir (1998). Empire by Integration: The United States and European Integration, 1945–1997. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-878212-8.
- Meyer, William H. (2003). Security, Economics, and Morality in American Foreign Policy: Contemporary Issues in Historical Context. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. ISBN 0-13-086390-4.
- Nye, Joseph S., Jr (2002). The Paradox of American Power: Why the World's Only Superpower Can't Go It Alone. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-515088-0.
- Odom, William (2004). America's Inadvertent Empire. Yale University Press. ISBN 0-300-10069-8.
- Patrick, Stewart; Shepard Forman, eds. (2001). Multilateralism and U.S. Foreign Policy: Ambivalent Engagement. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner. ISBN 1-58826-042-9.
- Perkins, John (2004). Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. Tihrān: Nashr-i Akhtarān. ISBN 1-57675-301-8.
- Rapkin, David P., ed. (1990). World Leadership and Hegemony. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner. ISBN 1-55587-189-5.
- Ruggie, John G., ed. (1993). Multilateralism Matters: The Theory and Praxis of an Institutional Form. New York: Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0-231-07980-8.
- Smith, Tony (1994). America's Mission: The United States and the Worldwide Struggle for Democracy in the Twentieth Century. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-03784-1.
- Tomlinson, John (1991). Cultural Imperialism: A Critical Introduction. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-4250-6.
- Todd, Emmanuel (2004). After the Empire: The Breakdown of the American Order. New York: Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0-231-13103-2.
- Tremblay, Rodrigue (2004). The New American Empire. Infinty publishing. ISBN 0-7414-1887-8.
- Zepezauer, Mark (2002). Boomerang! : How Our Covert Wars Have Created Enemies Across the Middle East and Brought Terror to America. Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press. ISBN 1-56751-222-4.
| ||
| ||
| ||
Timeline of articles
Images
Videos
Gaddafi blames Al-Qa'ida for insurrection
MUAMMAR Gaddafi blamed al-Qa'ida for the uprising that has gripped much of eastern Libya as he addressed his divided nation for the second time in a week.
Large parts of Libya under rebel control
John Lyons, Middle East correspondent MUAMMAR Gaddafi appeared to have lost control of large sections of Libya last night as protesters pledged to liberate the capital, Tripoli.
Obama warns 'all options' on table
Brad Norington, Washngton correspondent BARACK Obama has warned that his administration is preparing "the full range of options" in response to violence by Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi against his own people.
Libyans go their own way in east
James Hider A FREE Libya is starting to take shape in the east, where large sections of the army have defected and protesters have begun to form a government.
Saleh orders troops protect protesters
YEMENI President Ali Abdullah Saleh has ordered his security forces to offer "full protection" to anti-regime protesters and loyalists alike.
Saudi king shocked into popular measures
KING Abdullah has resumed power in oil-rich Saudi Arabia, returning to a Middle East transformed during his three-month absence.
Create a no-fly zone over Libya, now
David Aaronovitch IT is the duty of the West to stop Gaddafi before he sends planes to bomb his people.
Egypt's fate could be Malaysia's future
John Lee DAYS after the removal of Egyptian strongman Hosni Mubarak, Malaysian PM Najib Razak said: "Don't think what is happening there must happen in Malaysia."
Bahrain revolt a lesson for China
Bret Stephens WHAT is happening in Manama ought to be profoundly disquieting to the strongmen of Beijing.
Gaddafi's grip on Libya slips
UPDATED BARACK Obama branded Libya's crackdown as "outrageous" as the Gaddafi regime lost control of vast swaths of Libya's east to an insurrection.
Gaddafi ordered Lockerbie: minister
Anushka Asthana and Catherine Philps LIBYA'S former justice minister has claimed that he has evidence that Colonel Muammar Gaddafi personally ordered the Lockerbie bombing.
US praises Algerian law repeal
THE US State Department has hailed Algeria's move to lift a 19-year-old emergency law after unprecedented protests.
Dictator declares war on people
Richard Beeston THIS was the chilling moment the Arab Spring turned from a largely peaceful movement into a fight to the death.
Troops hunting rebels in Tripoli
CAIRO: Heavy gunfire broke out in Tripoli last night as forces loyal to Muammar Gaddafi tightened their grip on the Libyan capital.
Gaddafi threatens fight to the death
UPDATED LIBYAN leader Muammar Gaddafi has ordered his followers to crush an uprising against his 41-year rule and vowed a fight to the death.
Iranian warships enter Suez
CAIRO: Two Iranian naval ships have entered the Suez Canal, a canal official said yesterday, en route to Syria on a purported training mission that Israel regards as a provocation.
Tribal hostility to regime boiling over
WHEN the leader of a tribe from the east of the country denounced the actions of the Gaddafi regime on Sunday, few experts on Libya's history were surprised.
Mad dog of the Middle East
Greg Sheridan, Foreign editor Libya's Gaddafi is a vain eccentric who has held his country in a deadly grip
Bahraini revolt fuelled by elite
Peter Hendy The demand for change may be more about the Su-Shi issue than about democracy, writes Peter Hendy
Gaddafi defiant but regime is crumbling
John Lyons, Middle East correspondent LIBYAN leader Muammar Gaddafi yesterday made a bizarre and defiant television appearance as air force pilots were ordered to bomb protesters.
Australia readies for embassy defections
Mark Dodd AUSTRALIA is preparing for the potential defection of key diplomats from the Libyan embassy in Canberra.
US fears civil war if Gaddafi falls
Jay Solomon in Washington THE Obama administration has expressed fears of civil war in Libya as a decade of US diplomacy appears to have left Washington with little influence.
Western-loving Saif 'shows true colours'
Alexi Mostrous TRIPOLI: "I'm a lot more conservative than my father," Saif al-Islam Gaddafi declared in 2002. "My father is a real revolutionary."
Airstrikes launched to quell protesters
UPDATED LIBYAN armed forces launched airstrikes on protesters as Muammar Gaddafi's iron-fisted rule was rocked overnight with regime loyalists defecting.
Aussies may be evacuated from Libya
James Massola and Mark Dodd THE Gillard government is considering evacuating Australians from Libya as the nation's ambassador was called in for a dressing down in Canberra.
Bahrain crackdown
Bahraini riot police moved in early on Thursday morning to clear anti-government protesters from campsites at the Pearl roundabout in the ce...
Elation in Egypt
CRIES of "Egypt is free" rang out and fireworks lit up the sky as Egypt celebrated the resignation of President Hosni Mubarak.
Revolution in Egypt
Protesters in Egypt are jubilant after news President Hosni Mubarak is set to step down.
Saudi arrested over plot to blow up Bush
4:39AM UPDATED A SAUDI man has been arrested for allegedly buying chemicals to make a bomb, targeting the Dallas home of former president George W. Bush.
Dictator's idiots happy to take his cash
Gaddafi is the most absurd example of a monster adored by his ignorant fan club
French envoys take revenge
FRENCH diplomats have struck back, blaming President Nicolas Sarkozy and his advisers for the recent debacles abroad.
Christchurch earthquake
In depth coverage of the 6.3-magnitude earthquake that rocked Christchurch, and the New Zealand city's recovery in the aftermath.
Middle East Turmoil
In depth coverage of the turmoil engulfing the Middle East as regimes fight to maintain control.
Cyclone Yasi
In depth coverage of Tropical Cyclone Yasi and its passage across the north Queensland coast.
Australia Day Honours
Full coverage of the Australia Day and Australian of the Year awards with reports, galleries, and video.
Floods crisis
Reports, analysis, video, and multimedia on the flooding in eastern Australia, especially in Queensland and Victoria.
WikiLeaks
Stories and analysis of the fallout from the leaking of diplomatic cables and other secret material through the WikiLeaks website.
Cabinet papers
Each year we publish prevously top-secret cabinet papers released
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/middle-east-in-turmoil
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment