However, many events
during the first decade of the century have been considered belonging to the
previous one. Notably so, the long lasting armed conflicts around the world,
including even the Second Iraq war of infamous memory. And that, as the said
reason for the invasion of Iraq was the search of unexisting “weapons of mass
destruction” hoarded by Sadam Hussein after the first invasion of Iraq in the nineties.
Out of Barak H. Obama
second inauguration speech, open to many comments and considerations, comes
just a brief sentence “…A decade of war is now ending…”
What’s ending? Just
the decade?, the war? The last decade of war, wars, warmongering?
BHO is holder of the
2009 Nobel Peace Price for his “extraordinary
efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and
cooperation between peoples”, as the nomination says. Good enough.
It is not to criticize the politician, the president.
But considering presidencies as just periods of time in the evolving of
history, whatever decade we may consider, just the period of time between 2002
and 2012 encompassing the WH Bush second term and BHO first with wars galore, I
just can’t see an “ending” in sight in the incoming future.
The list of active armed conflicts is staggering.
Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_military_conflicts)
lists at least ten conflicts causing more than 1000 deaths per year, and some 40 others
less deadly. Many are just forgotten as they hardly ever reach the frontlines in
international media. And some others are just not recognized as actual wars, with
identifiable armies and military operations; just violence and killing of
people.
Some have ended having reached a peace treaty like the
Moro war in the Philippines, and others are just in some sort of standoff-lack-of-activity like the Moroccan-Western Sahara conflict. But many others are
wildly raging away with their sequences of loss of life, misery, destruction
of property and disaster.
To put an end to all that will prove to be too big of a task for even a powerful country like the US or the even more powerful
coalition of countries like NATO or whatever could enlist the UN to impose
peace on a given conflict.
But make no mistakes. BHO is not a weak or peaceful
type of guy, ready to withdraw or shun off from wars. In his record is the
killing of Osama Bin Laden and the ongoing drone attacks in North Western
Pakistan, not bad for military action on a supposedly allied country’s
territory. And the drone attacks may well expand to other geogaphical areas.
BHO has nominated John Brennan the new director of the
CIA, pending of confirmation by the Senate and after the Petraeus affair, previously Director of the national
Counterterrorism Center and not particularly a "dove".
Violence not necessarily considered “war” is usually
attributed to terrorist groups of which the CIA lists more than one hundred and
forty. So whatever “War on terrorism” means it could include all of them, and
is likely get a push by the new CIA director.
The US Defense spending will continue to rise despite
the tremendous weight it carried on the already monstrous US deficit of several
trillion dollars.
All that said, the armed conflict that calls more my
attention and for various reasons, is the Mexican Drug War. Just at the US
doorstep, mounting over 60.000 deaths and fought mostly with US
provided--legally for the Mexican government or illegal for everybody
else--weapons.
I would be interesting to see what the US and its
Defense community thinks and does of such a murderous situation in the coming
months.
X. Allué
Posts
