 |
| Source: Wikipedia, U.S. Military bases in 2007 |
Empires
come and empires go, and history shows that, while they try to stay, they will use a variety of methods to maintain their grip on power. Soft
power, hard power or so-called “smart" power -- whatever it takes
to keep tribute flowing in from the subjugated people and colonies,
and to keep the populace at the heart of the empire placid.
The
Ottoman empire ruled for five hundred years in the part
of the world that the U.S empire has been focused on mastering for the
last several decades. Southwest Asia with its fossil fuel reserves,
Northern Africa with its access to that rich continent plus proximity
to all that oil, and Europe on the northern shores of the
Mediterranean Sea, a central waterway. The Ottomans losing their
grip at the end of the 1800's was the catalyst for a scramble
by European nations and the U.S. for the prize of the fading empire's colonies -- leading to WWI, which led to WWII, which led to the Cold War, which
led to the long, long war on terror. The Ottoman decline is hardly
ancient history, and I think of it from time to time as I watch the
U.S. play clumsily at empire building.
To
catalog the brutality and intrigue the sultans used to stay in power
for so long would require a volume, if not several. For now, let's
focus attention on their immensely successful scheme of
co-optation. As a method of heading off the growth of viable resistance
movements in the hinterlands, the Ottomans had a brilliant idea: have their provincial administrators identify promising young
males in the colonies at an early age. These gifted youth would be
taken from their families and communities and whisked away to
the capital at Constantinople to be trained as janissaries. These were
the elite palace gurads and government administrators who served at
the seat of empire. They enjoyed prestige, privilege, an elegant
life, and no doubt the sense of being on the inside of the most
powerful empire on earth. They were playing on the A-team, as it
were.
Barack
Obama as the handpicked celebrity spokesman for the U.S/NATO empire
would have made a fine janissary. With one African parent, he offers
visible diversity. Brought up by a single mom on the white side of
his family, he talks a good working class perspective.
Scholarship-educated at elite private schools, he can talk that talk, too;
as a tall, slim athlete, on television he looks like a star. Ditto
the beautiful, brainy wife and darling children.
Elevating
Obama to the highest office in the land represented a brilliant
strategy on the part of the 1% doing business as the
military-industrial-media complex. His position as figurehead of the
Democratic Party provided unprecedented leverage to neutralize
liberals and progressives while continuing to wage wars of domination
across the globe. When Obama got elected, the millions who filled the streets during the Bush
W. administration opposing the wars just went home.
Relying on their sanitized information streams –
NPR, the New York Times, the Washington Post – they know little of drones or of Bradly Manning, nor could they care less about what he represents.
The passage of the NDAA 2012, and its signing by Obama, granting the
executive branch the power to indefinitely detain anyone, U.S.
citizen or otherwise, indefinitely without due process or right of
habeus corpus, is not even a blip on most liberal screens these day.
Many
of the pacified liberal class rely on human right organizations, to
which they contribute regularly to be the watchdogs. Organizations
like Amnesty International rely on their robust branding as watchdogs
to solicit that trust and those donations.
If
you were the Ottomans and it was 2012, which threats might you be
focused on neutralizing? Possibly you would be looking over your
shoulder at any sector of society likely to mount a credible resistance to your legitimacy as the self-proclaimed champion of democracy,
with a special emphasis on women's rights, around the globe.
Enter
Suzanne Nossel. The new executive director of Amnesty- USA worked at
the U.S. State department (think Hillary Clinton, Suzanne Rice, and
Madeleine Albrigh)t. Before coming to AI-USA Nossel published in
journals such as Foreign
Affairs
and Dissent,
articles defending, among other things, “RECLAIMING
LIBERAL INTERNATIONALISM,”
“smart power,” sanctions, and the cover of diplomatic engagement
prior to attacking Iran. She also gave an interview, which you can
see here
on Mondoweiss, debunking the Goldstone report which found human rights violations during Israel's Operation Cast Lead intensive
bombing of Gaza.
 |
| Operation Cast Lead victims. Source: http://www.socialistunity.com/operation-cast-lead-was-a-war-crime/ |
Nossel's
advertising campaign “NATO: keep the progress going!” ran in
Chicago during the NATO summit last May, supporting a shadow summit
on maintaining the alleged progress there for women, with panelists such as
Albright and current State Department staff, and an open letter on
the subject to presidents Obama and Karzai, signed by Albright and
various other celebrity liberals.
This
dovetailed nicely with NATO's official proclamation signed by heads of
state in Chicago, claiming “In the ten years
of our partnership the lives of
Afghan men, women and children, have improved significantly in terms
of security, education, health care, economic opportunity and the
assurance of rights and freedoms.
There is more to be done, but we are resolved to work together to
preserve the substantial progress we have made
during the past decade.”
Nothing subtle about NATO's
propaganda approach: tell a big lie, loudly and often.
Even better, get others to tell it for you.
Nossel's
role in getting Amnesty-USA to play a more subtle game providing a
pretext for military force on behalf of women's rights requires a bit
more investigation to be discovered. The 21st century version of
janissary recruitment may very well consist of luring young, talented
players like Nossel into the fold under cover of do-good, feel-good,
non-profit organizations. This provides good cover and keeps lots of
well-meaning people busy writing checks and feeling useful while the
real powers meet discreetly in Tokyo in July to hash out who is splitting the bills for continued “development" in Afghanistan.
Development
as in 300,000 Afghan troops and national police, consuming 90% of the
funds flowing towards continuing to secure the graveyard of empires.
There
will be many Nossels and Obamas in the years to come. Until the end of an empire there is never
any shortage of fat checks for serving empire, never any shortage of
ambitious young people, whether willingly or reluctantly, to play the
only well-funded game in town.
A
strong effort by several national organizations, including CODEPINK
(of which I am a member) to pressure Amnesty-USA to re-examine their policies
and Nossel's leadership, may or may not succeed. She has already made
a lot of enemies recently by removing 20% of Amnesty-USA's staff,
including all the regional directors, and the staff who headed up work on
Guantanamo. (Word is that new hires will be working more on "women's issues.")
Even if it does work, Nossel will find another job, and
Amnesty will find another executive director, and that person may
also enjoy close ties to the US government or other branches of the
empire.
Why
write and talk about the whitewash of U.S. global ambitions by
Amnesty-USA? So a few more liberals may wake up, smell the oil burning, and
turn off the propaganda feed. They would do well at that point to consider joining those who Occupy public spaces to witness for the power of
non-cooperation, civil disobedience, and solidarity over prestige,
creature comforts and a shiny resumé
