India Strikes Pakistan

 

India has attacked Pakistan. This follows an act of  terrorism that killed Indian tourist in Kashmir.. Kashmir is divided by Pakistan and India. Both the two Asian powers occupy the area. India blamed the Pakistani government for the murder of 26 Indian tourist. While it is known that Pakistan has funded and supported armed groups, little evidence exists this was a government directed operation. Pakistan has been fighting terrorist organizations and multiple armed groups. The return of the Taliban to power in Afghanistan created more turbulence. Operation Sindoor was launched in both Pakistan and Pakistani occupied Kashmir. The military strikes targeted Jaish e-Mohammed  and Lashkar e-Tayyiba. There have been three major Indo-Pakistani Wars. These occurred in 1947, 1965, and 1971. The Kargil War broke out in 1999. Fears are growing of another Indo-Pakistani War. The situation becomes more precarious with nuclear weapons. An Indian and Pakistani nuclear war devastate the region and the world. Mutual assured destruction could act as restraint for the two countries. An Indo-Pakistani War would complicate the BRICS association. China tends to favor Pakistan in its foreign policy. India is a member of BRICS which could cause tension. A regional war would create refugees. They would either flee to Central Asia, Europe, or Australia. Air strikes kill more civilians than enemy combatants. The Bharatiya Janata Party promotes anti-Muslim and Islamophobic policies. The BJP Party are Hindu nationalists and use anti-Muslim rhetoric to  obtain political support. The vituperation and abuse gets worse around India's election cycle. The hatred will intensify  with a war with Pakistan. Reports of the air forces of both countries are  fighting one another. It remains unclear how Pakistan will retaliate. India tends to win wars against Pakistan, but conditions in the region are different from the 20th century.  

The Failed Coup In The DRC

 

The Democratic Republic of the Congo foiled a coup. A number of African nations have been experiencing coups in the 2020s. The difference with the DRC was that it was not against a longtime regime. During this coup attempt, the presidential palace was attacked. The leader of this coup was Christian Malanga. He was killed during the coup attempt according to authorities in the DRC. Video shown shows the group with flags of the former Zaire. Those who were in the coup group appear to have nostalgia for the Joseph Mobutu dictatorship. Christian Malanga was involved in opposition politics and gold mining prior to the coup attempt. Malanga based on the information gathered was a refugee who settled in the United States. This was in the 1990s when Zaire was falling into civil war. His political activities were working for the United Congolese Party. The political party has been described as a movement to remove the current government. Questions have arisen about possible US involvement in the plot. No evidence has been uncovered of a CIA operation. Three American were allegedly were part of the coup group. The DRC is facing challenges from M23 rebels, Rwanda, and external powers seeking to exploit its natural resources. The coup attempt no matter how small was a demonstration of political instability. When this transpired political factionalism had reached record levels in the DRC. The New Zaire Government in Exile another organization wanted to revert the DRC to the years of 1971 to 1997. If enough evidence is gathered it could implicate the New Zaire Government in  Exile as being an accomplice to the coup.  

African Leaders Are Proposing A Peace Plan To The Russia-Ukraine War

 

African leaders have grown concerned about the war in Ukraine. Now, an effort is being made to formulate a plan for peace with South Africa taking leading the mission. African leaders will head to both Moscow and Kiev. President Cyril Ramaphosa has made phone calls to both President Vladimir Putin and President Volodymyr Zelensky. There remains doubts about success. The attempt should be praised, considering the European Union has done little. The peace mission demonstrates that African nations are becoming more influential on the international stage. Zambia, the Republic of the Congo, Senegal, Uganda, and Egypt are expected to have their heads of state attend the peace mission. President Hakainde Hichilema ( Zambia ) ,  President Dennis Sassou Nguesso (the Republic of the Congo ), President Macky Sall ( Senegal) ,  President Yoweri Museveni (Uganda), and President  Abdel Fattah el-Sisi are expected to make their arguments for peace. Many attending are longtime leaders, with the exception of President Hichilema who has been head of state since 2021. Other African leaders cannot attend due to internal matters. Sudan and Ethiopia are dealing with both ethnic conflict and civil war. The DRC grapples with an insurgency. Having more countries in the delegation could be helpful. Ghana, Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Angola, Zimbabwe, or Namibia could have joined the peace mission. The African peace mission should be deemed a positive development in European affairs. Peace will never come as long as NATO expands and the arms industry profits from the Russia-Ukraine War. The US, UK, France, and Germany want to see the conflict extended. South Africa was accused of sending weapons to Russia, but there remains to be evidence of such a transaction. It is clear that some European leaders want the peace mission to fail, for a number of reasons. Preserving the arms trade and dismantling Russia are objectives of those who want the war to escalate. What happens next depends on the terms prosed in a peace settlement.   

The Rapid Support Forces Revolt In Sudan

 

Sudan could be slipping into a state of civil war. The Rapid Support Forces have been engaged in combat with the Sudanese Army. Reports of fighting have been  documented throughout Sudan. Khartoum. Demonstrations against the Abdel Fattah al-Burhan regime continue. Sudan has remained unstable since the fall of the Omar al-Bashir government. The former regime is culpable for the conditions that currently exist. Sudan formed the Janjaweed militias to fight in Darfur. The region wanted to break off from Sudan. Those militias would form the RSF in 2013. The RSF was used for border security and fighting abroad. The RSF has participated in the war in Yemen. As the 2010s passed the security force became more powerful. The same force that Omar al-Bashir built up went on to participate in a coup against him. The RSF would also participate in the 2021 coup. Calls for their integration into the Sudanese military have been proposed. The paramilitary force would lose power if it were to do so. Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo commander of the RSF could be seeking to take control of government. The military and paramilitary  forces have more power than Sudanese citizens. Those who want to see democratic and civilian rule continue to struggle. Another Sudanese Civil War will spread into neighboring countries. Libya, Chad, Ethiopia, the African Central Republic,  Egypt,  and Eritrea could be effected. The RSF poses the most formidable threat to  al-Burhan's rule. So far, the RSF rebellion has not escalated to the extent of being classified as a civil war. Much of that depends on the total strength of the RSF. 

War Zones, Their Locations, And The Reduction Global Security

 War zones are areas of military combat. Warfare has been a part of human history since the establishment of  permanent settlement and civilization. Every continent has had some form of conflict at one stage. The hope after 1945 with the United Nations would be a reduction of conflict. Instead, there were a number of proxy wars waged by both the US and U.S.S.R. This also was intersected with anti-colonial liberation struggles against France, UK, Spain, and Portugal. The end of the Cold War did not reduce hostility. The aftermath related to the power void created issues in various parts of the world. The sole superpower remaining contributed to the expansion of war zones. While war zones can be in a few areas, this does not mean it can escalate. Small scale conflicts can spark larger ones. The fight for resources, economics, and politics can be factors in the spread of war zones. The majority of their locations are in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. These warzones are mostly in global south nations. The developed countries are either invading or causing destabilization in these regions. However, Europe is not immune from this. The Russia-Ukraine War has been a conflict that demonstrates a wider European war can be possible. The real fear is the launch of mass global conflict similar to that of World War I or World War II. Attempting to create world peace might not be feasible, but through diplomacy war zones can be contained. If war zones are not eliminated or sealed off they can fuse. Global security is reduced by the level of war zones present. The civilian deaths, refugee migration, and damage to infrastructure. Countries and entire regions cannot function under large war zones. The need to study and produce solutions to this problem require an international effort. Peace and anti-war organizations could benefit from examining war zones and their emergence. The war zones of the world are more than just battlefields. Their existence  can be a humanitarian crisis, a geopolitical tool, and  a world disturbance.

       War zones are areas of conflict in which nations fight. Civil wars are internal conflicts, but can still attract foreign powers to intervene. Insurgencies and armed revolts might not become full scale war. Much of that depends on how powerful the armed group is. When the central government no longer can control certain territories an insurrection or insurgency can escalate to war. Myanmar has a number of armed groups fighting the military government. It has not reached the point in which the country is in full scale civil war. Sudan's Second Civil War resulted in the creation in South Sudan. At one point it was one country, but the southern region broke off to form a Neur and Dinka state.  The Columbian conflict is unique in that it is both a civil war and an attempt to prevent failed state status. Since 1964, the government has been fighting paramilitary right-wing groups, leftist guerilla groups, and crime syndicates. Political and economic grievances might drive people to take up arms against a government. Political factionalism, ethnic nationalism, and regional identity can also be factors. Mexico has not reached a point of civil war, but struggles with narcoterrorism. To a degree it shares a similar experience with  Colombia. Terrorist organizations cause instability in Syria, Pakistan, Libya, Somalia, Burkina Faso, and Mozambique. All of these armed groups were not developed there indigenously. The UK, France, and the United States have armed terrorist groups as a method of regime change. This was done Libya and less successfully in Syria. The blowback is not just more terrorism, but opening new war zones across continents. North Africa was destabilized from NATO's attack on Libya. This created the worse refugee crisis in recent history. 

War zones are not easily contained. Fighting can spread across borders. The reason the Sahel in Africa is seeing an increase in armed conflict is due to NATO's attack on Africa in 2011. The tension between India and Pakistan does involve Afghanistan to an extent. Pakistan's ISI has used the Taliban as a counterbalance to its regional rival of India. Both India and Pakistan have fought three wars against one another and peace does not seem attainable under such conditions. The US-Afghan War culminated in refugees and the return of the Taliban to power. The stability of Central Asia was disrupted by 20 years of military occupation. The West has made regime change and military intervention a form of foreign policy. Masking neo-colonial imperialism as humanitarian projects produced dire consequences. Iraq has not seen substantial improvement since the 2003 Iraq War. The emergence of ISIS expanded war zones between Syria. Even when conflict is over the damage from the war zones remain. Infrastructure and population decline make it difficult to rebuild a society. The requirements for a stable society include economic security, education, healthcare, functional government, and a high standard of living. Without these requirements a state that was once a war zone could become a failed state. Major world powers continue to use weaker nations in a geopolitical chessboard. Ukraine has become victim to this as its land has become a war of proxy between NATO and the Russian Federation. The Democratic Republic of The Congo is subject to interference by its neighbors. The DRC is rich in copper, cobalt, diamonds, gold, and coltan. Iran, Syria, and  Libya have oil which also makes these nations targets of more powerful countries.   World power competition, neo-colonial imperialism,  and internal state crisis  contribute to the expansion of war zones. 

      The United Nations was established as an international organization for countries to resolve disputes. Diplomacy and peaceful resolution is the goal. Instead the United Nations either induces or continues existing conflicts. The majority of UN missions have been conducted in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The completed missions do not improve the nations in which the UN peacekeepers have been active. Haiti, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Central African Republic, and Sudan are examples of worsening conditions. A serious criticism or analysis of peacekeeping has not been mentioned in diplomatic circles. The notion that an armed occupying force will bring peace is misguided. The UN Peacekeepers would have to act as a neutral force. However, it becomes clear that the enforcement of an international rules based order is selective. Global South nations are subject to violence by France, the UK, and,  the United States . The international rules based order does not exist as long as the US-EU block violates international law. A UN Peacekeeping mission would never operate in America or a European country. A glaring contradictions also exists with the UN Peacekeeping force. National sovereignty is being violated with long term military occupation. UN Peacekeepers are not diplomats; they are a fighting force. Undermining a nation's independence was not the intent of the United Nations. Unless the UN Peacekeeping force acts as a buffer against armed factions or warring parties conflicts will continue unrestricted. The model only makes its so that UN Peacekeepers are fighting multiple armed groups or being a permanent occupation force. The active mission headquarters are permanent in African and Asian countries. 

UN Peacekeeping does operate in accordance with certain mandates. Much of it is dependent on the situation. Authorization from the Security Council is required. The basic principles the United Nations asserts applies to all missions. The first is impartiality. UN Peacekeepers are not suppose to aid warring parties in a mission. If this were true, Kosovo would not be in its current situation. Kosovo is a part of Serbia, but it appears as if the UN favors its separation. Israel has engaged in a number of war abuses, but has never been subject to restrictions by the United Nations.  UN Peacekeepers have also been involved in the abuse of civilians in various nations they have occupied. Instances of sexual abuse by UN Peacekeepers in Haiti shows similar behaviors of  armed forces of nation-states. A solution has been suggested that by getting more women involved in peacekeeping operations could reduce case of rape and sexual violence. That would have minimal effect if corruption is at the highest level. UN Peacekeepers are to engage in combat only in the defense of the mandate or if attacked. War zones are unstable and if a mandate is nebulous that justifies an attack at any time. For UN Peacekeepers to be present in a country there needs to be consent. It is difficult to get consent from multiple warring parties. A legitimate government could be removed or a series of regime changes could take place. Armed factions actively engaged in combat will not consent. The M23 rebels and Seleka rebels are not recognized as legitimate political organizations by the DRC or the African Central Republic. Situations become more complicated when examining the conditions of South Sudan or Somalia. The biggest contradiction is that an armed force brings peace. The United Nations has not reduced war. At times they enabled it through UN resolutions. UN Security Council Resolution 678 allowed for escalation of the Gulf War,  the UN Protection force involved in the Yugoslav Wars, and UN Resolution 1973 justified a no-fly zone over Libya. UN Peacekeeping does not promote global stability. 

      Global security is reduced by the spread of war zones. The current wars might seem like isolated occurrences, but there exists a possibility of them merging. The push to mass global conflict becomes greater when war zones expand and  world powers have poor diplomatic relations. The United States of America,  the Russian Federation, and the People's Republic of China are  not having essential dialogue. Instead the US follows a neo-colonial imperialist trajectory making enemies of any country that it deems a threat. Destabilizing regions, regime change, and expanding military presence around the world caused a reaction. Russia and China do not want to be subject to an international order forcibly imposed by the United States. The world powers are now engaged in various forms of geopolitical competition. Wars of proxy will expand in the coming decades. No region will be safe. Prior to World War I, the Balkan Wars were a catalyst for the crisis of 1914. Previous conflicts and  incidents culminated in  mass global conflict. Japan invaded Manchuria in 1931 and  set out to conquer all of China in 1937. Italy invaded Ethiopia and Germany annexed Austria. These wars and territorial expansions occurred before World War II, but morphed into a larger conflict. The war zones in Ukraine, Syria, Somalia, the DRC, and Afghanistan could merge into a larger war. The more involvement by external powers increases this danger. The nations with nuclear weapons become even greater threats. The more the Russia-Ukraine War escalates the closer the US and Russia come to nuclear exchange.  New war zones could be opened. North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, and Nicaragua could be subject to regime change in the coming decades. Latin America has been victim to US military action, but it might not induce a response from Russia or China. Actions directed at Iran or North Korea will. The entire world is held hostage by  the few powerful nations that refuse to solve disputes by diplomatic means. The countries that are subject to violence do not have enough military strength to resist. If resistance does happen, asymmetric warfare or guerilla warfare has to be used. Thus an endless cycle of violence is set in motion. Small conflicts will attract large powers to intervene. 

       The location of war zones is not accident. Africa, Latin America,  and Asia were under colonial rule. The age of European colonial imperialism brought slavery, violence, and war. When it came to making maps boundaries created would cause the conflicts of the present. The mandate system under the direction of the British Empire and France created the borders of the Middle East. The formation of the state of Israel contributed to more conflict in the region. Anti-colonial wars were fought in Africa and Asia to expel the French, British, Dutch, and Belgians. South Africa, Vietnam, Zimbabwe, Angola, Mozambique, Algeria, Kenya, and Namibia fought long independence struggles. Africa and Asia contain an abundance of natural resources, which the colonial powers robbed them of. The desire to exploit the labor and resources never dissipated. This explains why the West directs aggression against the Global South. The economic benefits of imperial conquest  remain a foreign policy objective. Unlike the past a more sophisticated method is used to make it acceptable to the public. The concept of humanitarian intervention justifies violence as saving people.  Bombings and military force are presented as humanitarian. This disguises acts of brutality and war crimes. Violations of international law are viewed as necessary under the responsibility to protect. More people het killed as the result of humanitarian intervention. Counting the deaths of civilians and soldiers exposes the false argument of human rights protection. Human rights never will come from warfare. The attacks on  the Global South are about maintaining a system of oppression and geopolitical dominance. The US-EU block want to maintain a leading position in the world and  keep the Global South in a subordinate status. The imperial order has been updated to make it more palatable to the citizens of the West. The formerly colonized are still fighting to preserve their independence. 

        War zones are going to be a constant challenge. Geopolitical disturbances are happening simultaneously. The forces behind this are governments, the arms industry, and  past imperial legacies. Nations that were at peace can go to war. Internal conflicts can spill over into neighboring countries. Armed groups, militias, paramilitary forces, and terrorist organizations might to be strong enough to overthrow a government. Overtime, some can become formidable enough to bring a country into civil war. If a conflict lasts long enough to get attention from other countries, it is no longer a internal affair. World powers that decide to intervene making it an international matter. Altruism is not a factor. The intent either focuses on obtaining resources, building influence, or establishing a puppet state. War zones can be used as geopolitical tools. Engineered state destruction, regime change, or destabilization are methods employed to dispatch of certain leaders. Doing this has serious repercussions. The world becomes disturbed. Fighting stops, but the damage remains. The loss of human life makes it impossible for a nation to rebuild or be productive. Infrastructure will take time to replace. The basic social fabric of various communities will be destroyed. History has shown that a nation can recover from war. The concern with the contemporary period is that war zones across the world will merge into a large international conflict. Nuclear attacks between countries and constant military intervention could cause the collapse of world civilization. Even if a nation was the victor in a international war, nothing would be left. This can be prevented. All war zones cannot be eliminated. Containing them is a realistic option given current circumstances. Diplomacy must be skillfully used  to keep peace and avoid war. Militarism should not be a pillar of foreign policy. The United Nations needs reform so that it can become an institution that stops violence, rather than being an accomplice to it. The dramatic rise in war zones requires new solutions and a better approach.        

Fears Grow of Belarus Entering The Russia-Ukraine War

 

Belarus could play a military role in the Russia-Ukraine War. The annexations in the eastern section of Ukraine demonstrate that the Russian Federation could win the war. Sources have reported that military drills have increased in Belarus. President Alexander Lukashenko ordered Belarussian troops to deploy with Russia's forces along the Ukraine border. If Belarus is about to invade, Ukraine would have to fight in both the north and east. The response to Belarus has been the threat of sanctions. Belarus was a staging ground for Russian troops in the invasion. Belarus has not engaged in combat operations. If the war continues the country might be tempted to join. Ukraine cannot win on its own and at some stage will face partition. Belarus could be calculating which parts it would take from Ukraine. This is why a peace settlement must be reached before a larger onslaught. The attacks on the Nord Stream pipelines and Crimea indicate dramatic escalation of the conflict. Debate remains about how effective the Belarussian military would be in the war. Belarus has not been at war for 30 years. Strikes in the north of Ukraine could reduce strength of forces in the south and east. Belarus is not a NATO member, but Russia might believe in the distant future it could forced into that orbit. President Lukashenko is often presented as a puppet pressured  by the Russian Federation. If that were the case Belarus would have joined the fighting by now. Russia and Belarus are close allies, but it does not mean it does not mean the country will blindly follow. The Russian Federation has the option of building up Belarus as a counter to a NATO backed Ukraine. Belarus also acts as a buffer state against Poland and Lithuania. If Belarus enters the war, then the conflict could spread throughout Eastern Europe.   

The Darya Dugina Assassination

 

Journalist Darya Dugina was assassinated under mysterious circumstances. A car bomb was detonated, but no group has claimed responsibility for the murder. The speculation was that some in Ukraine were the culprits. Other theories are that it was the Russian government itself. No evidence of this has been produced. The murder will surely have an impact on the Russia-Ukraine war. The official statements by the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) is that it was a Ukrainian plot. Natalia Vovk is a suspect in the murder. Ukraine continues to deny accusations that it planned an assassination. It is unclear if Darya was the actual target or Alexander Dugin. Darya was supportive of Russia's invasion, which would make her a target. Ukraine made the claim that the real culprits were Russian separatists groups. The FSB claims it was a conspiracy of the Azov Battalion. Darya Dugina was not a political figure and did not hold power in the United Russia Party. This was an attack of extremists on a journalist. Oddly, the media is not framing it in that way. The reason could be due to growing anti-Russian sentiment in the West. Journalists of all nations face the threat of violence or death. 

Growing Protests In Libya

 

Protests are spreading across Libya. The population has become vexed at the high prices, power cuts, political inaction, and an overall decline in the standard of living. The Tobruk parliament  was attacked. The country is divided between rival governments with the other based in Tripoli. Libya might be falling apart. Armed groups and terrorist organizations remain active. The prosperous African nation has become closer to a failed state over the past decade. The United Nations has attempted to broker a settlement between rival factions. The destabilization was the result of UN  Security Council Resolution 1972 and the NATO invasion. Under Qaddafi Libya had free education and healthcare. The United Nations has condemned the protesters attacks on government buildings. The condemnation seems contradictory considering the UN enabled the destabilization in the country. Libya did not hold elections last December due to the security situation and possible corruption. Libyans are now seeing their government as more of a puppet to foreign interests. Libya is gradually falling into another civil war, which if it continues could cause some form of balkanization.  

The Mystery Around The Location of Joseph Kony

 

Joseph Kony of the Lord's Resistance Army has never been captured. The rebel group  has been active in Uganda, the DRC, South Sudan, and the African Central Republic. Despite warrants for Kony's arrest, finding him has been a challenge. The rebel group has been around since 1987, but the release of Kony 2012 made western audiences familiar with the rebel group. The documentary gave a simplistic analysis of a complex conflict related to the Ugandan Civil from 1986 to 1994. Rebel groups were seeking the removal of the President Yoweri Museveni. The Acholi were an ethnic group that faced persecution by the government. The Lord's Resistance Army formed in response to this. The myth is that the organization wants to liberate all Ugandans and establish democratic rule. The real agenda is to create a state based around their own version of Christian fundamentalism. The LRA is still active, but not as powerful as it was in the 1990s. The sudden interest of the US to capture the warlord is not out of  altruism. The ICC already issued a warrant for his arrest in 2005. The United States wants to have a larger military presence in Africa. This is designed to counter both Russian and Chinese influence in Africa. By acting like it is a humanitarian mission the US can send advisors to the African Central Republic. The Lord's Resistance Army also provides Ugandan president Yoweri Museveni with an excuse to maintain an authoritarian political structure. It has been speculated that Kony is based in the Central African Republic. Nothing is certain, however his activities provide an excuse for abuses by world powers and authoritarian regimes.    

The American Militarist State

The United States has one of the world's most powerful armies. The country's influence and power can be seen on almost every continent and has few challengers. The US faces new competition from a world moving toward a multipolarity relative to international relations. China and Russia have moved closer together in both an economic and political alliance in response to American actions around the globe. This alliance may not be enough to neutralize American prominence around the world. The desire to remain the world's sole superpower has disturbed the peace. What has emerged from it is a new political and social phenomenon. America has molded itself into a militarist state. The national security state was used to describe how the US build up it military power and security apparatus to confront the Soviet Union at the expense of civil liberties. The American militarist state goes much further. It seeks to impose a global order by force and undermine liberal democracy as well as human rights. The American militarist state can only function under conditions of perpetual warfare and a military industrial complex. As long as their is an economic incentive in arms production a stable and peaceful world will never be attainable. The main objective the American militarist state is to maintain US dominance and  the economic position it hold in the world. Foreign and domestic policy have gradually been revolving around the US Military establishment. The American militarist state glorifies the armed forces combining it with a fanatical patriotism. While this is common among the conservative political factions, few leftists ever speak seriously about anti-war politics or criticize the the military establishment. Centrists even do this claiming to be part of a politics of moderation. There has been such a change in thought and public opinion that some acts that would be considered deplorable are now accepted. Aggressive war, civilian deaths, and war crimes do not phase the American public as much as in previous generations. From the end of the 20th century to early 21st, the US has shifted to a political model seen in authoritarian regimes. Countries may have democratic institutions, but the military has an abnormal amount of power. Sudan, Algeria, Egypt, Thailand, and Myanmar continue to struggle with the challenge of the military controlling civilian government. If the military or abuses of law are not confronted, it is possible the US could resemble an authoritarian political structure. The American militarist state was born out the Cold War, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the War on Terror. The result is unrestrained military power having influence in world politics and domestic affairs. 

     After World War II the geopolitical structure changed. The defeat of fascism left a void in world politics that was filled with two new superpowers. The United States and the Soviet Union became enemies  for  global influence. The US began taking on a role as a policing figure to counter the Soviet Union. NATO was formed as a military alliance against the Soviet Union. Russia formed the Warsaw Pact as a response.  The former African and Asian colonies of the European empires were joining the non-aligned movement. This was known as the Third World, which became areas of Cold War conflict. What emerged was the myth America was the defender of the free world. The United States aided and fought for various dictatorships as long as they were anti-communist. Leaders such as Joseph Mobutu( DRC  ) , Ferdinand Marcos ( Philippines)  , Ngo Diem (South Vietnam ) , Suharto (Indonesia ), and Augusto Pinochet (Chile) served US interests. This was why their human rights abuses were never scrutinized.  The origins of the American militarist state emerged from containment policy . The United States fought wars in Korea, Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam. As the British Empire and France lost their colonies, America's involvement grew in both Africa and Asia. From 1950 to 1989 the US justified military action using anti-communism as a reason. 

 The Korean War was a turning point. The containment policy put the US on the path to war on various continents. 

Simultaneously, the US was engaged in a nuclear arms race with Russia. Nuclear war was avoided, but only through diplomacy.  The Cuban missile crisis was a point in which nuclear brinkmanship put the world in danger. Nuclear weapons did not prevent the two superpowers going to war. The devastation that was caused by World War II was an event both countries wanted to avoid. The Soviet Union suffered more, due to the German invasion. Russia would have not been able to survive another World War. Yet, a myth emerged that the Soviet Union was set on global domination. A simplistic world view cast America as a protagonist and Russia as international menace. The world was undergoing a realignment and the communist governments around the world were not monoliths. Albania and Yugoslavia did not follow a Soviet model. China and Russia relations deteriorated in the late 1950s resulting in the Sino-Soviet split. Cuba's communism was adjusted to its Latin American political traditions. The non-aligned movement did not favor the US or the U.S.S.R  in terms of world politics. The objective of the newly independent states was development and preserving national sovereignty. What these new nations discovered was  the US targeted  them for their natural resources. The CIA became involved in deposing legitimate governments Guatemala, Iran, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Chile. The defeat in Vietnam did not cause the US to adopt a more peaceful policy. At the end of the Cold War saw an invasion of Grenada , Panama, and airstrikes on Libya. CIA covert action in Afghanistan would have dire consequences years later. Between the years of 1989 to 1991 the Soviet Union underwent a deterioration. Without another superpower, the justification for a permanent state of warfare could not be maintained. One opportunity did come with Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990. The American militarist state had another reason to exist. 

       The myth of human rights and democracy promotion  has been used to keep the US involved in military intervention. The expansion of warfare only undermines liberal democracy. Imposing political system by force is nothing more than disguised neo-colonial imperialism . The Gulf War and the Iraq War was not about liberating people from Saddam Hussein. The intent was to ensure the US has access to the oil of the Middle East. The bombing of Kosovo was not out of concern for  ethnic cleansing in Yugoslavia. A federal socialist government  model could not coexist with neoliberal capitalist  EU states. The United States recognized three of the Yugoslav republics. Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina were given recognition in 1992, while Yugoslavia was in a state of civil war. Instead of attempting to mediate an intense situation the US and European Community aided in its collapse. New countries that were war torn would require financial assistance . Even with a change in administration certain nations faced attack. The US was part of a UN mission in Somalia and conducted a failed raid in 1993. Iraq although under sanction was subject to bombing in 1998. Operation Desert Fox  was an act of aggression and justified by the accusation that Iraq was not complying with the UN Security Council resolutions. Iraq was suspected of hiding weapons of mass destruction. When Iraq was invaded in 2003, no weapons of mass destruction were found. The US wants to present acts of aggressive warfare as saving people from tyrants or terrible conditions. War as it is in the American militarist state is necessary to save civilians. The illusion is shattered when the results of nation building projects are shown. Before Iraq, Afghanistan was an experimental area for the neoconservative  vision. Twenty years the United States could not defeat the Taliban or Haqqani  Network. Drone strikes and acts of terrorism caused a high amount of civilian death. The mendacious claim used was that the US was fighting for women's rights and to free the Afghans from Taliban rule. What  the state transformed into was a puppet government with an insurgency that it was not able to defeat. 

When America entered the 21st century, anti-communism was replaced with counter-terrorism. The military intervention  parallels  containment policy. Acts of aggressive war were conducted in both Iraq and Afghanistan. 

The military direction of the United States went from anti-communism and counter-terrorism. There is a stark difference. Communism is an economic and political ideology. Terrorism is a tactic of using violence to achieve a political aim. Attempting to wage war on a tactic is not possible. The War on Terror is nothing more than coded language for endless military intervention. The label terrorist could be applied to any country. The United States between 2001 to 2017 used counter-terrorism to strengthen the militarist state. The death of Osama Bin Laden and the decline of Al-Qaeda's significance caused the argument to lose cogency. Syria and Libya were attacked under responsibility to protect concept rather than counter-terrorism. The drone strikes in Yemen are the only example of counter-terrorism being used an excuse for aggression against the Houthi rebels. A new existential threat needed to be imagined. 

     Relations with China, Russia, and the US have been in sharp decline. Russia  has once more been demonized by the US. China a rising economic and military power has caused fear in the US-EU elite. The American militarist state welcomes the new era of tension and possible conflict. Developing a new Cold War or sparking mass global conflict enables a permanent state of warfare. Counter-terrorism has reached its limit. Fighting ISIS, Al-Shabab, or Al-Qaeda will not longer be enough to get public support. Creating one enemy allow for people to be more fearful. Presenting Russia and China as nefarious countries contributes to preparing the public for military action. Narratives do not need to follow any logic. The United States remains at the moment, the most powerful country in the world. America's influence extends across the globe. Russia and China would not be able to win in a conflict against the US. The notion that both countries are striving for  world conquest is more farcical than fact. The United States has more military bases around the world and  high quality military equipment. Both Russia and China  have to take a defensive position in relation to America. NATO is another military extension which could in the distant future expand. The United States is shifting its attention to Asia-Pacific. The sale of nuclear submarines to Australia, demonstrates that the Asia pivot is going to be a permanent part of US foreign policy. Tensions between Taiwan and China are exploited to expand America's influence in the Asia-Pacific region. North Korea also becomes a  justification for belligerent actions by the US. The dispute in the South China Sea is between various Asian nations. However, America interferes as a method of provoking China. Efforts or attempts at diplomacy are either rejected or not given a chance. The United States of America wants to remain the world's sole superpower no matter the cost. Doing this risks military confrontation with both China and Russia. 

        The American militarist state makes regime change a foreign policy objective. The United States has a long history of removing governments and establishing authoritarian regimes that support American policies. Countries that are able to resist the US are either subject to extreme sanctions, sabotage, or bombing. Cuba, Venezuela, and Iran  are nations that may at some point see military strikes from the US. Cuba has been subject to US sanctions since 1962 and  no matter what presidential administration they remain in place. Venezuela is a candidate for invasion. The United States induced a coup under the Bush administration in 2002. The Obama administration continued to pressure the Hugo Chavez government. Both the Trump and Biden administrations  made attempts to have President  Nicholas Maduro deposed. Regime change is made to be a humanitarian mission, rather than what it really is. The US wants to establish puppet governments that are subordinate to geopolitical interests. A powerful Iran undermines America's foothold in the Arabian peninsula. Without regional resistance, the US would have a more access to oil fields of the region. This explains why the US refuses to leave Syria, because of its oil resources and alliance to Iran. If both governments were to fall, America would have a free hand to mold the region. Waging aggressive war in a blatant manner would generate international condemnation. To avoid backlash, the US will  use elements of asymmetric  warfare combined with degrading the economy of a particular country. CIA funded armed groups or opposition can help in causing internal insurrection. Sanctions and diplomatic isolation are methods to further crush a nation. What are referred to as rouge states do not have enough military power to be serious threats. The US has the power to destroy or destabilize numerous regions. What stops it to a degree is international public opinion and the aftermath of massive conflicts. Refugees, war crimes, and diplomatic disputes hinder America's ability to act without restraint. There will come a time in which the country becomes so abusive the majority of the world might unite against it. 

      The public has been conditioned to believe that all of the wars waged are for a just cause. Pro-war propaganda has been a part of the media and entertainment. Paid patriotism at football games and news programs acting as a public relations arm for the Pentagon are just a few examples. The military has gained a larger influence over American culture. It is not enough to have influence over foreign policy. The cultural narrative must be centered around the idea that the US must constantly fight an enemy. More commercials appear on television directed at young men and women to join the US military. It is presented as a stable career  that comes with opportunities for advancement. For some, it is a way to get a college education. There are benefits, but the more negative aspects are not mentioned in recruitment. Veterans struggle with homelessness and unemployment. Issues with the distribution of benefits are a persistent problem. The way veterans are treated is not the best example of an honorable fighting force. The American militarist state makes it seem as if this institutional corruption does not exist. The military is depicted as a heroic force for good. Despite the long history of atrocities, the myth is agreed upon both the liberal and conservative factions of  American politics. The existential crisis is when the realities of a multipolar world order and military defeat are apparent. Complex geopolitical issues are reduced to simplistic analysis as a battle between good and evil. Sometimes there is no righteous cause; there are malevolent actors. Fear has to be presented in the media about certain nations, races, and various groups. This is the only means in which the US military can control pubic perception of its actions. The national security apparatus is not designed for protecting people living in the US. It exist to maintain American geopolitical dominance. Holidays such as Veteran's Day and Memorial Day are used to advance political agendas, when it is really meant to remember those who lost their lives. Instead their deaths are used as an excuse to expand conflict. To oppose wars in American culture has become a sign of disloyalty. As social problems increase this type of aggressive jingoistic ideology becomes more acceptable. It creates cohesion in a society in gradual decay. Americans are becoming  more divided by class, race, and politics.  The militarist state maintains its power by directing that hostility overseas. 

       The economic incentive is a major element of the American militarist state. Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and various arms manufacturers  make enormous profit from warfare. The military  industrial complex is a significant part of the US economy. The irony is that it causes economic instability. To maintain a war machine of this magnitude requires an immense amount of funds. The US citizen must therefore pay higher federal income tax to aid the military budget. If money is being extracted mostly from the poor and middle class excluding the rich economic health suffers. The majority become impoverished, while simultaneously education, infrastructure, and welfare programs are underfunded. The public appears to favor this immense flow of money to the military, despite the repercussions. The money that is spent on weapons, military bases, and aircraft could be used for healthcare or universal basic income. The American militarist state is supported by corporations intent on increasing profit maximization.. Peace would mean an end to business. Networks of lobbying allow defense contractors to have hold over particular political figures. This explains why there is no significant change related reducing US military engagements. The economic motivations are too powerful. The majority of countries that America has attacked are one's with certain natural resources. Fossil fuels are becoming  scarce and the United States is slow to make the transition to alternative energy. Consumption increases and demand remains high. Oil rich nations such as Venezuela, Libya, and  Iraq were inevitably going to be targeted by the United States. Afghanistan has vast mineral wealth that has not been fully explored. An empire tends to extract resources from its colonies. The problem is that the US met large amounts of resistance from the nations that it invaded. The profit came from the production of tanks, aircraft, and guns. Private security companies benefited from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The American militarist state does not exist for a political purpose only. The military industrial complex is part of a larger economic foundation.

        The American militarist state has impacted daily life. Violence becomes more common within the United States. Militarized law enforcement is a growing concern. Weapons used in past conflicts are given to various police departments throughout the nation. The obsession with war is transforming America into a police state. Every aspect of life becomes more focused on security. Those who oppose the establishment are going to be the victims of violence. The abuse of protesters in the anti-racist demonstrations in 2020 was a reminder of the power of the American militarist state. Fears of future coups or mass civil unrest have been discussed in political circles. The combination of militarized law enforcement and an extremist faction of the US military could mean the representative  republic is in a fragile condition. Individuals are becoming more paranoid of what the government classifies as potential threats. Inducing trepidation and uncertainty into the public is a means controlling them. Militarized police and a huge military budget are justified as maintaining security. The illusion of safety is cover to increase government power and reduce legal protections for citizens. There may be a time in which material conditions become so awful that the population might revolt. Multiple injustices and economic inequality could be a catalyst for mass insurrection across the US. If it spreads the military would respond. The methods of war and military occupation would be applied to US streets. A country cannot go around the world inflicting violence with out  repercussion. The abuses in Asia, Africa, and Latin America will be replicated on American soil. The United States has undergone a dramatic transformation. The shift went from being a mere national security state to a militarist aggressor. The objective is not to reduce war or conflict, but how to start new disputes. The United States continues to embrace the militarist state at the expense of basic rights and freedoms.           

President George W. Bush Announces Military Action In Afghanistan (2001)

 

As a result of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, the US went to war with Afghanistan. President Bush announced the military action to the US public in October of 2001. The Taliban did not declare war on the US. Al-Qaeda did not have political control over the country, but was present there. The US demanded that Osama Bin Laden be extradited. The Taliban only would do this if the US provided evidence of his involvement in the attacks. The Bush administration did not do this and embarked on airstrikes and a ground invasion. The Afghan War was not about freedom or fighting terrorism. The country has vast mineral wealth, which has not been fully extracted. Afghanistan contains iron, lithium, copper, cobalt, chromium,   and uranium . The Bush administration's agenda was to advance the military industrial complex and expand the arms industry. The invasion of Iraq was the next logical step in the neoconservative vision. Afghanistan was the first  experiment in nation building and imposing  liberal democracy by military force. The US  entered into a country with two factions fighting each other. The Northern Alliance was fighting the Taliban prior to US invasion. The war was fought for 20 years and drew parallels to the US defeat in Vietnam.      

The Military Takes Power In Guinea

 

A coup has been staged in Guinea. The country's new leader Mamady Doumbouya has declared curfew for Guinea. Certain industries are exempt and are encouraged to continue their work. President Alpha Conde who has been in power for ten years is in custody. Tensions have been building ever since he ran for a third term. The 2020 presidential election saw accusations of fraud. Conde was once more president, which caused growing protests. Guinea is a country rich in resources, but the country struggles economically. The UN, ECOWAS, and African Union have condemned the coup. All have called for Alpha Conde's release. The change in the constitution allowed Conde to run for a third term. If this never happened, Guinea would not be in this condition. The concern is that bauxite mining might come to a halt if the country gets too unstable. Although mining increased under Conde, the average citizen did not see an increase in wealth. What remains unclear is if  ECOWAS will either invade or impose sanctions. This was done to Gambia. However, this was not done to Mali. The uneven application of rules and policies display a clear bias. 

Sudan and Egypt Are Strengthening Military Ties

 

The military ties between Sudan and Egypt are growing stronger. The reason for this development is longtime disputes with Ethiopia over the Nile River. Access to water is going to be a large source of conflict around the world. This is now happening in Africa. Sudan and Egypt have conducted war games and drills. This has involved both air and naval units. The talks about the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam reached an impasse. So far, there have been no efforts to start a dialogue between Sudan, Egypt, and Ethiopia. The African Union does not seem to be taking action about what could be a move to war. What also complicates matters is the conditions with the Tigray in Ethiopia. The Blue and White Nile hold much importance to both countries. Egypt wants an agreement that portions of its waters will not be taken to fill the reservoirs for  the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam. Both Egypt and Sudan have seen instability with the fall of longtime leaders. Now that Omar Al-Bashir and Hosni Mubarak are no longer a political force the region is undergoing transformation. The dispute over water has made both countries more hostile to Ethiopian infrastructure projects. Other countries will take note of this division. It is possible Sudan's neighbors could get involved. 

Chadian President Idriss Deby Has Been Killed By Rebels

 

The longtime president of Chad has been killed by rebels. This comes after it was announced to serve his sixth term as president of the African country. Idriss Deby came to power in 1990 through a rebellion against the Hissene Habre regime. President Idriss Deby was one of Africa's longest serving leaders. Under his leadership reforms were limited and the same authoritarian structure remained in place. Chad's military involvement in other neighboring countries is disturbing its internal security. Chad has been a partner in France's campaign to combat terrorism in Africa. Although Deby was allied to EU countries, Chad had diplomatic relations with China. Chad is of interest to due to its large oil reserves and cotton production . Many times his regime was saved from revolt through French military assistance. The army announced Deby's death, naming his son as a successor. This is seen as a coup rather than a constitutional transfer of power. Mahamat Deby the son of   Idriss is a commander in the Chadian Army. He was commander of the UN peacekeeping forces in Mali. The rebels intend to take the capital, but this may not be so simple considering Mahamat's military experience. There are growing fears that N' Djamena will become a battle ground. Little evidence exists to suggest Idriss Deby was assassinated  or victim of a conspiratorial plot. The official narrative was that he was visiting soldiers on the frontline and was slain from a sudden attack. The death of Deby will have an impact on Nigeria, Cameroon, and Niger. Those nations established a strong military alliance to fight rebel factions and terrorist organizations. Idriss Deby promised peace and security to Chad, but instead engaged in military interventions. Sudan, Libya, and the African Central Republic saw the involvement of Chadian soldiers in protracted  conflicts. His legacy will be one of war and violence. 

The US Has No Plans On Leaving Afghanistan Or Syria

 

The Biden administration has launched a strike in Syria. This was directed at Iranian backed militias that allegedly attacked US personnel. President Biden has not given any time frame about an exit from Afghanistan. The longest war in US history may continue even longer. The attack on Syria also demonstrates that President Joseph Biden is not committed to reestablishing the nuclear agreement. A plan for improvement of relations has not been articulated. When Americans voted, they desired a change in foreign policy and an end to long term military intervention. As domestic issue mount, military engagements will only harm the economy. The US is attempting to undermine Iran's influence in the Middle East, but without a powerful Iraq this is not possible. The Biden presidency is following failed policies from the past three  administrations. The Taliban  remains resistant to the US-NATO force. If this continues the US will see a conflict worse than the Vietnam War. The Obama administration attempted regime change in Syria and this only resulted in a larger Russian presence in the Middle East. President Joseph Biden's policy is regime change with the use of US funded armed groups. America's quest for global hegemony comes at a price. Lives lost, higher taxes, and the violation of international law will become more common.    

The European Union Renews Arms Embargo Against Zimbabwe

 

The European Union has renewed  the arms embargo against Zimbabwe. Sanctions still remain in place. The claim is related to the country's human rights situation, but other African nations that favor EU policies are exempt.  While sanctions against  government officials can be justified, economic warfare against the population is not. The UK is the most vocal in keeping sanctions. The reason is not out of the concern for human rights, rather to have influence over a former colony. There was little condemnation with the military coup in 2017 that ended the Robert Mugabe presidency. The reason was due to the idea that President Emmerson Mnangawa  would be more accommodating to EU foreign policy objectives. His  repression became more apparent with the imprisonment of journalists and opposition figures. Zimbabwe internal politics need reform, but it should not be directed by external foreign entities . The African Union can be a place of dialogue and regulation of arms being imported into Africa. The global arms trade is a challenge to stability because it aids in the continuation of various conflicts. This arms embargo is not designed to stop some form of military aggression or protect the public from a coup. Zimbabwe may be gradually weakened for future regime change. Whatever the true intention is Zimbabweans still live under unfavorable conditions.   

Namibia Rejects Germany's Reparations

 

Germany made an attempt at reconciliation with its colonial past by making an offer of reparations to Namibia. However, this seems like an empty gesture considering the amount of death that occurred between 1904 and 1907.  The Herero and Namaqua were targeted by the German Empire. The rebellion against German colonial rule resulted in the violence from  Kaiser Wilhelm II. Germany wanted to be on equal footing with other European powers and engaged in imperial conquest. The rebellion was crushed, but German Southwest Africa was lost to the Allies during World War I. President Hage Geingob rejected Germany's offer on the basis the amount of reparations funds remains too low. Negotiations for compensation have been  conducted since 2015, with little progress. Descendants of the few survivors of the genocide are demanding a total of  $4,000,000,000 in compensation. Germany continues to remain more intractable in regards to compensation. While the two countries do maintain relations, they may become strained. The offers Germany proposes have been revealed to be 10,000,000 euros ($11,000,000) . This proposed agreement is not acceptable to the people who lost their lives and a nation still vexed about  past colonial practice. Chancellor Angela Merkel has not made any attempts to increase compensation  or reparation amounts. If Germany was able to pay compensation to Israel for the Holocaust, there should be limited dispute about doing the same for Namibia. Germany has a stronger economy in comparison to other European Union states. If  Namibia cannot get a compensation amount that is acceptable, it should consider dismantling diplomatic relations. Apologies are not enough to eliminate  the legacy of colonial  aggression. The negotiations may take longer, however Namibia has the support of other African nations. The African Union could start taking interest in member states that want compensation from other countries such as France, the UK, Spain, Belgium, and Portugal.  

Aung San Suu Kyi Initiates the Panglong Peace Talks

 

Myanmar still remains a country in conflict, even with a civilian government. Ethnic conflict between the Kachin, Shan, and Kayin  continues with clashes being frequent. Suu Kyi is not fully in control, with the military still retaining significant influence in government. The Panglong peace talks were designed to end conflict through a permanent settlement. This is further complicated by the Rohingya crisis, which has created a large number of refugees. Aung Suu Kyi was criticized for her handling of the situation, which caused damaged relations between the US and EU nations. The peace talks cannot advance as long as the military remains an obstacle. The attempt at establishing a democratic system becomes more fragile, the longer war continues. Myanmar could go through a process of balkanization if insurgencies continue. Racism and prejudice must be confronted if the country is to remain whole. A federal system or semi-autonomous regional systems may be required to address historical grievances. Having another election will not solve these complex political and ethnic problems. Already frustration is beginning to grow. As Myanmar becomes more shunned by the West, it has more closer to China. This increases the likelihood it will be targeted for sanctions. Aung San Suu Kyi has announced that she intends to run for president in the November elections. If a peace deal or some form of agreement is not reached it would make attaining office more difficult. Peace may have to come from a strong executive branch that limits military power. If she does win office, it would need more authority to make a change in policy.    

Mali Falls to a Military Coup

 

Mali has faced both political and social challenges. The ineffective government has collapsed giving way to a military coup. The resignation of President Keita has left a power void in the country. Since the coup, the African Union voted to suspend Mali. The coup leaders have promised that elections will take place. This is uncertain considering Mali may not function like Sudan after the fall of a leader. Azawad and the fall out from the fall of Qaddafi continues to effect the country even after nine years. The coup leaders call themselves the National Committee for the Salvation of the People. Some want President Ibrahim Keita reinstated according to some sources at the AU. Prior to the coup, his administration was accused of corruption, economic mismanagement, and interference in legislative elections. Demonstrations expanded with people becoming more frustrated with the government. Mali could face an AU intervention, civil war, and further civil disturbance if stability is not established. If problems of the people go unaddressed, the situation will only intensify.  

Israel and The United Arab Emirates Confirm Peace Agreement

 

Prince Mohammad Bin Zayed and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu confirmed that Israel and the UAE are set to establish diplomatic relations. This sudden recognition for peace was facilitated by the United States. The agreement states that Israel will not annex the West Bank in exchange for bilateral ties with the UAE. This seems difficult to imagine that Israel would refrain from its wider territorial ambitions. Considering that the Lukid Party uses anti-Arab racism to energize the right-wing of Israeli politics. There could also be another ulterior motive. Israel may be attempting to build a gulf state coalition to confront Iran. Doing so would make it easier for Israel to conduct military action. Saudi Arabia already is engaged in a proxy war with Iran in Yemen. The Trump administration wants to present this as a diplomatic victory, however complications may just be starting. The Palestinians have limited support in their efforts to establish a state. Settlement construction continues and the occupation still persists. Egypt and Jordan used to be dedicated supporters of the cause for Palestinian national self-determination until they open relations with Israel. Without support from Arab nations or UN resolutions Palestinians could fall victim to further Israeli violence. There still remains the possibility negotiations could collapse. Besides political agreements, the UAE wants economic cooperation with Israel.