The Worldwide Illicit Activities of the US Government And its Impact on the People of the World

President Barack Obama (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

[Please note: a large portion of this article has been removed by the editor, Madote.]


The Worldwide Illicit Activities of the US Government And its Impact on the People of the World 


Drs. Tsegezab Gebregergis, London, May 16, 2010

1. Introduction

This article relates to the worldwide covert and overt illegal activities that the United States government conducts against many sovereign Third World countries – activities that are incompatible with international law and norms. It is meant to be supplementary to my posting of January 14, 2010, which appeared under the title “The United Nations Sanctions against Eritrea: Based on Facts or Utter lies?”[1]. In this piece, I attempted to show that the UN sanctions imposed against Eritrea were part of an illegal act and a collective punishment against Eritrea and its people. Consequently, I called upon Eritreans inside and outside the country, and upon other progressive and democratic forces the world over, to oppose the sanctions, expose their illegitimacy and exert all kinds of political pressure for their invalidation.

As I have already indicated, this piece of writing, as its title suggests, deals with the dangers associated with aggressive US foreign policy and the unlawful activities the US Government conducts to undermine foreign governments that are recalcitrant in towing the US line. It is written and analysed from a Third World perspective in general and African perspectives in particular. In short, the article deals with the arrogance through which the US projects its power, and the need and urgency to limit, or altogether shelve, that power and many policies based on contempt against those nations that oppose its adventurist foreign policy. Furthermore, the article attempts to show that unless this reckless US foreign policy is reshuffled to reflect the multiplicity of interests of the various powers operating in the contemporary world, and the aspirations of many millions of Third World and African people, world peace and security will be in perpetual danger.

There is so much that I have to say by way of an introduction, so let me now deal with the issue of how the US has emerged to be the sole irresponsible superpower in the world today, and what the repercussions of this mean as far as world peace and stability are concerned.

2. The Emergence of the USA as the Sole World Power

With the fall of the Berlin wall in 1989 and the collapse of the former Soviet Union in 1991, along with the subsequent ending of the Cold War, the United States emerged with an unchallenged, super-imperialist power to police the world. As such, the US Government set out to recreate the world in its own image and bring every strategic route and resource in the world – especially Arabian, African and other Middle Eastern oil deposits – under its control [2a]. Thus, in order to achieve its imperialist strategic goals and economic interests, the US Government decided to neutralise all ‘disobedient’ regimes opposed to its absolute hegemony. How and why the US Government did, and continues to do, this shall be clearer understood as we proceed to deal with the main arguments advanced in this writing. As stated already, the US is the sole imperialist military super power in the world today. But the US is a power which does not understand that to be a superpower also entails having super-responsibility. This super-imperialist power is engaged today under the cover of globalisation in Americanising (Westernising) the world by using brute force, all kinds of pretexts and lies. Indeed, today the US is holding the peoples of the world hostage under its imperialist fangs and claws of oppression. As such, the US has become a serious menace to world peace and its overall security. Having observed this to be the case, a leading German monthly magazine has stated: “Never before in modern history has a country dominated the earth so totally as the United States does today... America is today the Schwarzenegger of international politics: showing of muscles, obtrusive, intimidating... the Americans, in the absence of limits put to them by anybody or anything, act as if they own a kind of blank [cheque] in their “Mcworld” [2b]. 

Indeed, the US today encircles the globe totally with military bases containing weapons of mass intimidation, destruction [3], awe and shock, and is terrorising, harassing and bombing in a cowardly fashion using drone aircraft and through its deployment of long-range missiles, any country which refuses to comply with and submit to its dictatorial and selfish agenda. In short, and to put it sadly, the world has become a US hostage and a play ground for its inept politicians [4].

It is thus extremely important to note that the post-Cold War policies of the leading Western imperialist powers, led by the US and British governments, has been to deliberately demonise and label regimes around the world that oppose imperialist bullying and interference in their internal affairs as rogue states, and to diplomatically isolate and economically strangulate them. This is then usually followed by imposing illegal sanctions, fomenting internal coups or military invasions to effect regime change. In reality, if we define ‘rogue’ states as those deliberately flouting and undermining international law, as well as disregarding civilised behaviour, then the American and British governments fall under this definition, not those that oppose and resist their foreign policies.

It would be in order here to give some concrete examples of what a rogue state does by way of intimidating Third World regimes: the shooting down of two Libyan planes in 1981 and the bombing of Lebanon and Libya in 1986; the shooting down of two more Libyan planes in 1989; the sinking of an Iranian ship in 1987; the shooting down of an Iranian passenger plane in 1988, killing every one of its 250 passengers; the unending bombing of Iraq and its defenceless people under various lies used as pretexts in 2003; the invasion and endless bombing of Afghanistan; the destruction, by use of cruise missiles, of a pharmaceutical plant in the Sudan under the pretext that it was a training centre for terrorists and a chemical weapons manufacturing plant in 1993; the bombing of targets in Somalia; and the 1999 non-stop day and night bombing of Yugoslavia for 80 days. All of these acts and deeds were perpetrated by the brigandage of a rogue imperialist superpower that wants to own and keep the world in awe and subjection [5]. In many other instances, the US Government has also been very busy in blackmailing, intimidating and threatening the leaders of many other sovereign countries that dare to stand up to challenge its hypocritical political behaviour. Here again is a very good example in the case of Cuba. For more than 45 years, Cuba and its leaders have been the victims of the US Government’s propagandist lies, harassment, economic blockades and assassination attempts. The Sandinista leaders of Nicaragua were also subjected to all kinds of sabotage and blackmail by the US Government through the financing and training of counterrevolutionary groups against their government, with the express aim to overthrow and replace them by agent regimes [6]. Moreover, the US Government has been the main provider of financial, diplomatic, military and intelligence assistance, and in training the military and intelligence forces of many repressive terrorist regimes in Latin America against the popular opposition to their tyrannical rule [7]. The US Government cannot, therefore, be the friend of the poor people of Third World countries, as it does not and cannot learn from its messy past involvement in the internal affairs of other nations and would never consider or respect the aspirations and interests of poor nations in other parts of the globe.

Another example is the US Government’s war with Vietnam for more than 25 years, from 1950 until 1975. Why? Because the US did not want to recognise or accept that Vietnam had the right to follow its own chosen path of development. Likewise, for half a century, the US has been in a no-war and no-peace situation with Cuba.

At present, the US is at odds with the governments of many countries including North Korea, Venezuela, Iran, Sudan, Zimbabwe and, most recently, Eritrea. This is mainly because the US wants to choke the national aspirations of these countries and wants to dictate rather than enter into dialogue with the leaders of these countries. Indeed, the US and British governments seem only interested in imposing their unacceptable and non-workable policies, and telling other sovereign governments what lines they should or should not follow. This does and can only lead to direct confrontation with Third World countries and leaders that want to advance the national interests of their own countries.

It was precisely as a result of observing the imperialist arrogance of his government that the highly respected American democratic, Senator William J. Fulbright, gave the following piece of advice to his country in early 1965: “The most striking characteristic of a great nation is not the mere possession of power but the wisdom and restraint and the largeness of view with which that power is exercised. A great nation is one which is capable of looking beyond its own view of the world, or recognizing that, however convinced it may be of the beneficence of its own role and aims, other nations may be equally persuaded of their own benevolence and good intent. It is a mark of both greatness and maturity when a nation like the United States, without abandoning its convictions and commitments, is capable at the same time of acknowledging that there may be some merit and even good intent in the views and aims of its adversaries. In the past, it has come about when, for one reason or another, the West has set itself in opposition to the national aspirations of the emerging peoples. It is to be hoped that in the future the United States will leave no country in doubt as to its friendship and support for legitimate national aspirations. If we do this, I do not think that we will soon find ourselves in another conflict like the one in Vietnam” [8].

Unfortunately, this deeply penetrating and insightful piece of advice that Senator Fulbright bestowed on his country remains unheeded, or rather ignored, to this very day. For, instead of applying that sound counsel into a working policy to guide American foreign policy, American foreign policy today is guided by the highly intractable, antagonistic and quasi-fascistic guiding principle of “with us or against us”[9]. As a result, the United States is still engaged today in criminal wars, far worse even than the one in Vietnam. In so doing, the US and British governments, far from making friends, are mobilising enemies against themselves in every corner of the world. No wonder, from time to time, that both the US and the UK have become the targets of angry men and women from plundered and impoverished nations [10]. Nonetheless, the Americans, instead of trying to understand the root causes of anti-Americanism, tend to believe ignorantly or otherwise that they are hated because the people of other countries are jealous of the freedoms and wealth they enjoy [11].

To say the least, Americans’ understanding of the issues is lamentable. They are hated not because the adversaries of America are jealous of the plundered wealth they enjoy. Rather, it is because the American Government pursues aggressive imperialistic foreign policies vis-à-vis sovereign foreign governments and provides unrestricted diplomatic, military, economic and intelligence assistance to oppressive governments the world over [12]. Thus, hard reality seems to suggest that the policy makers in Washington and London, and the other powers which tail behind them, should think more seriously and realistically when dealing with foreign policy matters and abandon their aggressive strategies. Moreover, as the protracted war in Vietnam and the recent American and NATO involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan has proved, wars are not decided by weapons of awe and shock, or in the air by raining down computer-guided missile or pilotless drone aircraft attacks in a cowardly fashion. The outcome of war is always decided on land, and in the end, it is the people with a just cause that triumph. 

It was for all the ugly things the United States Government has been committing since its foundation in 1776 that John Tirman, director of MIT’s prestigious Centre for International Studies, recently wrote a book called: “100 Ways America is Screwing Up the World”. In it, and when questioned on my radio show, he refused to dismiss the notion that humanity might have been better off if Europeans had never settled in North America in the first place, i.e. if the USA as we know it had never come into existence[13]. This exemplifies what many Americans themselves think of what their government does to the rest of the world. I wonder whether the Americans know what the rest of the world thinks of them, especially those whose daily lives are directly disrupted by what America does to them.


3. Concluding Remarks

The main objective in writing this article is to demonstrate that the ferocious historical enmity of the US Government towards Eritrea and its people is not an isolated incident directed as such against Eritrea and its people. It is rather directed against all governments and people in the world that are opposed to the US’s aggressive and selfish imperialist foreign policy. As I have tried to show in this writing, the US Government and its junior European partners do not have friends, except for those that share their naked imperialist dictated interests, and do not recognise friends that do not fit into the patterns of their global strategic and economic interests. If, therefore, a certain country becomes a victim of US imperialism, as Eritrea and its people are at present, it is not because Eritreans are undiplomatic or lack diplomatic knowledge, understanding and skills, or are a threat to neighbours, as some pedant school teachers and half-baked journalists have been suggesting lately. In the Eritrean case, it simply means that Eritrean national and security interests are at loggerheads with the imperialist interests chosen by the US and its puppets. Hence, the country which refuses to submit to imperialist interest is then criminalised and penalised under various pretexts and unverifiable accusations. With the help of the weapons of mass deception (WMD), which are in the sole possession of the powerful imperialist countries, lies become truth and truth becomes lies. It is in such a treasonous manner that some unfortunate Third World countries are firstly demonised with the help of the “free press” and finally are trapped in the American and British governments’ carefully prepared snares. Once trapped in a well prepared trapping nest, some of them never come out to see the light of the day. What follows is indeed slow death.

Paradoxically, while all these unjust, immoral, inhuman and ugly measures are being taken against the weaker nations by the most powerful imperialist countries - ugly measures which lead to the slow demise of the unfortunate countries and their people – the international community seems to look on as a silent witness [16]. What a junky world to live in! [17]

Furthermore, in writing this article, I also want to show that opposition to and the struggle against local tyranny, without at the sometime resistance against global tyranny, will not have any effect as far the struggle for democracy and human rights and the improvement of the life conditions of the people is concerned. For, as I have tried to demonstrate in this writing, just as retail terrorism is the product of wholesale state terrorism; local tyrants are also the inevitable products of a larger global political and economic tyranny perpetuated in the world. So, as far as I am concerned, unless global tyranny is directly confronted and removed, local tyranny is here to stay. A good reason for this is that scarcity and poverty are inimical to the development of democracy and the protection of human rights. Indeed, scarcity and poverty are the twin factors which provide fertile ground for tyrannical regimes to emerge and perpetuate their rule. In other words, these two elements are the antithesis of democracy, while on the other hand accelerated economic development and higher educational attainment in society creates the right social environment under which democracy and human rights can flourish and take roots.

In addition, what is expected from progressive Eritrean democrats is to go beyond the general demand for democracy and for capitalism as an economic system and choose an alternative democratic economic system which allows secure autonomous and rapid economic development. For, in the world of today, there cannot be meaningful development under a dependent capitalist system. After all, democracy as a political system and capitalism as an economic system are two diametrically opposed approaches under which balance cannot be achieved. Where there is no balance, there cannot also be peace and stability in society. The two are as mutually opposed as thesis and antithesis. Thus, capitalism as an economic system and democracy as a political system cannot travel together without causing the breakdown of societal order. So, let us go and choose an alternative democratic economic system.

As far as US foreign policy is concerned, it is high time for President Barack Obama and his foreign policy advisers to understand the aggressive and antagonistic nature of US foreign policy and formulate non-antagonistic, non-confrontational and realistic American foreign policy as advised by the towering democratic Senator, William J. Fulbright.

In this respect, it is very important that the American people and the people of the rest of the world understand that the US -created and administered uni-polar world is the most unstable, antagonistic and dangerous system the world has ever seen. It is so because the system does not give political breathing space for the lesser powers. Thus, by definition and in its practical applicability, a world system which excludes and marginalises the great continents of Africa, South America and Asia can never be said to function in the interests of the peace and happiness of the people of the world. It is therefore in the interests of peace, stability and justice for the majority of people in the world to live under a thoroughly democratised and energised inclusive system of multi-polarity. Thus, in order to offset the excessive, unlimited power the US Government possesses and unilaterally exercises at present on a world scale, we need to oppose and struggle in unison to revert to a refreshed multi-polar world system. All world systems have their strengths and weaknesses, as does the multi-polar world order, but it is the best alternative the world could have at present when compared with the uni-polar world order in place. It should be clearly understood that living under a uni-polar world order on a world level is no different than living under a suffocating one-party system on a national level. Therefore, if the world’s political community justly opposes the one-party system as undemocratic - one which kills self-initiative and creativity on a national level – I do not understand why we should tolerate and accept living as we do today under a uni-polar world order on a world level. Henceforth, concretely speaking, what I am advocating is that at the current stage of human development, an arrangement based on a multi-polar world system consisting of the US, Japan, China, India, Russia, the EU, Australia, the UK, AU and the Southern American states as a single block would be the most ideal way to guarantee a balanced world, peace and harmony.

Similarly, there is an urgent need to do away with the parasitic system of imperialism, as imperialism throughout its history has always been the source of tensions, conflicts and wars between nations and within nations. Indeed, the endemic conflicts that are manifesting themselves in what appear at first sight as ethnic, religious and history-induced conflicts are, in reality, generated by imperialist-created economic pauperism. This reality is confirmed by the fact that the said conflicts become only operative in countries that are raked (bedevilled) by imperialist-created economic crisis. When I say this, I do not mean, however, to belittle or ignore the roles of insecurity, the deficit of political and civic consciousness, the weakness of political culture and reactionary forces that play in the conflicts raging within nations. It is when I see the contemporary world in such a light that I advocate there is an urgent need to create a world without imperialism if we are to live a renewed and peaceful existence.

In the meantime, there is also an urgent need for Africa and its people to choose their own forms of economic and governmental regimes freely. African problems need to be solved by Africans themselves, without the crude interference of the US Government and its intelligence forces (CIA). What is more, it also very important and is urgently required that African resources, be those under or above the African soil, should be solely used for the betterment of the lives of the impoverished and economically marginalised African people. It is in the interests of world peace and stability that the African people must not be denied the wealth that Africa possesses. Finally, I believe, we all could benefit from a better and much safer world to live in – for ourselves and our children – if and when the US Government adopts a non-antagonistic and non-interventionist policy in general, along with an African foreign policy which reflects African aspirations in particular.


Notes and References

<sup>1. My article bearing the title “The United Nations Sanctions against Eritrea: Based on Facts or Utter lies?” was posted on meskerem.net on January 14, 2010 in the section “No-to-Sanction”.

2a. As far as my understanding of global politics is concerned; the primary aim of the US attack on Iraq was to secure Iraqi oil fields. Nevertheless, just as the dropping of two hydrogen bombs over the most populated cities of Japan while its government was militarily defeated and was about ready to surrender to the American General was meant to intimidate the Soviet Union, likewise the American attack on Iraq and Afghanistan was meant also to demonstrate to its rivals the immense superiority of US firepower, to consolidate its control over the region supplying the world's oil, to build up a string of bases on China's flanks and, as an extension of all of these things, to dominate the extraction and transmission of oil and gas from and through Central Asia and the Caspian Basin to Europe and beyond. On this and similar other issues, especially so if one wishes to understand the main reason why the US Government declared war on Iraq, “Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America's Growing Dependency on Imported Petroleum” (Metropolitan Books, 2004), by Michael Klare, is a must read. See also his earlier book, “Resource Wars: The New Landscape of Global Conflict.”

2b. This was stated in the leading German magazine, Der Spiegel (1997).

3. Facts of this nature are stated in “The Sorrows of Empire, Militarism, Secrecy, and the end of the Republic” (2004), by Chalmers Johnson, Chapter 3, pp.67-95.

4. According to Chalmers Johnson, “as of September 2002, the US Department of Defense acknowledged at least 725 American Military bases existed outside the USA” (see “The Sorrows of Empire, Militarism, Secrecy, and the end of the Republic” p.4. As far as my observations go, every passing year more bases are being established. To learn more about the issues I have raised in this writing, see also an excellent book the “Rogue State, A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower” (2002), by William Blum.

5. All of the terrorist acts committed by the US Government against Third World countries and their leaders observed in this writing are stated in “Covert Action, The Roots of Terrorism”(203), by Ellen Ray & William H. Schaap (Editors).

6. See again for this, “Covert Action” ibid.

7. See “The Washington Connection and Third World Fascism, The Political Economy Of Human Rights: Volume 1” (1979), by Noam Chomsky & Edward S. Herman. See also the “Rogue State” ibid.

8. This is stated in “The Vietnamese Revolution” (1972), by Robert Goldstone, pp.202-203.

9. These quasi-fascistic words are the infamous words uttered by George Bush to intimidate world leaders into submission immediately after the September 11 terrorist attacks on the US.

10. Although terror and terrorism must and should be strongly condemned, it is also important for social and political scientists to spell out clearly what motivates angry young men and women to involve themselves in suicidal terror projects in which they could never be in any way winners. Nonetheless, already existing studies show that retail terrorists are always the product of larger wholesale terror freely exercised by the US Government and the state of Israel against many countries considered their adversaries. See, for example, “The Washington Connection And Third World Fascism, The Political Economy Of Human Rights: Volume 1” ibid, Chapter 3, titled “Benign Terror”, pp.85-203. See also the chapter titled “Constructive Terror”, p.205.

11. For example, I heard George W. Bush saying on TV on several occasions: “Those people hate America, they hate all that it stands for; they hate our democracy, our freedom, our wealth, our secular government.”

12. Just as “Covert Action, The Roots of Terrorism” documents all the arms which the US Government has sold to dictatorial and corrupt regimes throughout the Third World in order to suppress their own people, in his book “Hidden Agenda” (1998), John Pilger also documents all the weapons with destructive powers the British Government has supplied to oppressive dictatorial and fascistic regimes throughout Africa, Latin America, Asia and Far Eastern countries. See the chapter entitled “Arming the World”, pp.115-152.

13. See “100 Ways America is Screwing Up the World” by John Tirman.


17. I simply use the term “junky world” to express that the world we live in today is very disorderly, chaotic and without to any moral values to defend.</sup>

Sponsored Ads