In a sense, the Cold War has never ended for the U.S. government. It has morphed into a strategy of countering or lessening Russia’s power and influence while picking up as many pieces (countries) as possible that ring Russia. The U.S. will do the same regarding China. U.S. policy does not contemplate a world with several major powers that are anything near equal, but a world with one major and dominant power, the U.S. The extensions of NATO into eastern Europe and former republics of the USSR are part of this strategy. NATO is a U.S. tool, and the U.S. will weaken it if that suits the U.S. tactics.
The constant thread in U.S. actions is tactical opportunism in the strategic goal of extending and securing U.S. global power and influence.
I have been reminded (via an e-mail) that the U.S. has, at times, supported fundamentalist Muslims, radical Muslims, secessionist Muslims, mujahideen, and al-Qaeda. It did so in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Kosovo, and Libya. Now, in Syria, we are seeing a repeat performance in which it suits the U.S. to lay back, offering indirect support, while Muslims seek to overturn Assad. Even in Iraq, the U.S. has supported a Muslim state, as opposed to Saddam’s secular one. Why? It is to build up support and a presence in countries that were once in the Soviet orbit, not out of any love for Muslims or terrorist tactics that some of them use.
The U.S. now has a foothold in the Balkans. It will offer support in Syria if and when it sees the way clear to the success of a new government, if it thinks that the anti-Assad forces will win. It will offer enough aid and comfort to help in the “liberation,” but really to gain another foothold. The U.S. will continue trying to gain footholds in central Asia along Russia’s underbelly.
Last November, Obama explicitly asserted U.S. power in the Asia-Pacific. This is a counter-China policy. His African policy similarly has a counter-China element. And notice that in Africa the U.S. will opportunistically go against Muslims or use them to achieve its ends.
U.S. diplomats will deny that U.S. policies are anti-Russia or anti-China, or that the U.S. intent is to contain them. But it is clear that the U.S. aims to neutralize any policies of these two states that the U.S. regards as contrary to its interests, which are the interests of those controlling forces that lie behind the U.S. government.
