View previous stories
	Stagger On, Weary Titan by Timothy Garton Ash The Guardian   Aug 2005   If you want to know what London was like in 1905, come to Washington in 2005. Imperial gravitas and massive self-importance. That sense of being the center of the world, and of needing to know what happens in every corner of the world because you might be called on - or at least feel called upon - to intervene there. Hyperpower. Top dog. And yet, gnawing away beneath the surface, the nagging fear that your global supremacy is not half so secure as you would wish. As Joseph Chamberlain, the British colonial secretary, put it in 1902: "The weary Titan staggers under the too vast orb of his fate."   The United States is now that weary Titan. In the British case, the angst was a result of the unexpectedly protracted, bloody and costly Boer war, in which a small group of foreign insurgents defied the mightiest military the world had seen; concern about the rising economic power of Germany and the United States; and a combination of imperial overstretch with socio-economic problems at home. In the American case, it"s a result of the unexpectedly protracted, bloody and costly Iraq war, in which a small group of foreign insurgents defies the mightiest military the world has seen; concern about the rising economic power of China and India; and a combination of imperial overstretch with socio-economic problems at home.   Iraq is America"s Boer war. Remember that after the British had declared the end of major combat operations in the summer of 1900, the Boers launched a campaign of guerrilla warfare that kept British troops on the run for another two years. The British won only by a ruthlessness of which, I"m glad to say, the democratic, squeamish and still basically anti-colonialist United States appears incapable. In the end, the British had 450,000 British and colonial troops there (compared with some 150,000 US troops in Iraq), and herded roughly a quarter of the Boer population into concentration camps, where many died.   In a recent CNN/Gallup poll, 54% of those asked said it was a mistake to send American troops into Iraq, and 57% said the Iraq war has made the US less safe from terrorism. The protest camp outside President Bush"s ranch in Crawford, which grew around the mother of a soldier who died in Iraq, exemplifies the pain. CNN last Sunday aired a documentary with top-level sources explaining in detail how the intelligence on Saddam"s weapons of mass destruction was distorted, abused, sexed up and, as the program was entitled, Dead Wrong. This will hardly be news for British or European readers, but the facts have not been so widely aired in the US. In another poll, the number of those who rated the president as "honest" fell below 50% for the first time. This week, he has again attempted to bolster support for his administration and his war. It doesn"t seem to be working.   A recent article in the New York Times plausibly estimated the prospective long-term cost of the Iraq War at more than $1 trillion. If Iraqi politicians do finally agree a draft constitution for their country today, only the world"s greatest optimist can believe that it will turn Iraq into a peaceful, stable, democratic federal republic. Increasingly, the Islamic Republic of Iran quietly calls the shots in the Shia south of Iraq. As the Washington joke goes: the war is over, and the Iranians won.   Meanwhile, oil prices of more than $60 a barrel put the price of petrol at American pumps up to nearly $3 a gallon for basic unleaded fuel. For someone from Europe this is still unbelievably cheap, but you should hear the shrieks of agony here. "Gas prices have changed my life," moaned a distressed Californian commuter. If higher energy prices persist, they threaten not just a still vibrant economy but a whole way of life, symbolized by the Hummer (in both its civilian and military versions). Besides instability in the Middle East, the main force pushing up oil prices is the relentless growth of demand for energy from the emerging economic giants of Asia. The Chinese go around the world quietly signing big oil supply deals with any oil-producing country they can find, however nasty its politics, including Sudan and Iran. When a Chinese concern tried to buy a big California energy company, that was too much - American politicians screamed and effectively blocked the deal.   China and India are to the United States today what Germany and America were to Britain a hundred years ago. China is now the world"s second largest energy consumer, after the United States. It also has the world"s second largest foreign currency reserves, after Japan and followed by Taiwan, South Korea and India. In the foreign reserve stakes, the US comes only ninth, after Singapore and just before Malaysia. According to some economists, the US has an effective net savings rate - taking account of all public spending and debt - of zero. Nil. Zilch. This country does not save; it spends. The television channels are still full of a maddening barrage of endless commercials, enticing you to spend, spend, spend - and then to "consolidate" your accumulated debt in one easy package.   None of this is to suggest that the United States will decline and fall tomorrow. Far from it. After all, the British empire lasted for another 40 years after 1905. In fact, it grew to its largest extent after 1918, before it signed its own death warrant by expending its blood and treasure to defeat Adolf Hitler (not the worst way to go). Similarly, one may anticipate that America"s informal empire - its network of military bases and semi-protectorates - will continue to grow. The United States, like Edwardian Britain, still has formidable resources of economic, technological and military power, cultural attractiveness and, not least, the will to stay on top. As one British music hall ditty at that time proclaimed:   And we mean to be top dog still. Bow-wow. Yes, we mean to be top dog still.   You don"t have to go very far to hear that refrain in Washington today. The Bush administration"s national security strategy makes no bones about the goal of maintaining military supremacy. But whether the "American century" that began in 1945 will last until 2045, 2035 or only 2025, its end can already be glimpsed on the horizon.   If you are, by any chance, of that persuasion that would instinctively find this a cause for rejoicing, pause for a moment to consider two things: first, that major shifts of power between rising and falling great powers have usually been accompanied by major wars; and second, that the next top dog could be a lot worse.   So this is no time for schadenfreude. It"s a time for critical solidarity. A few far-sighted people in Washington are beginning to formulate a long-term American strategy of trying to create an international order that would protect the interests of liberal democracies even when American hyperpower has faded; and to encourage rising powers such as India and China to sign up to such an order. That is exactly what today"s weary Titan should be doing, and we should help him do it.
	The End of Liberalism? by Andrei Belikov The Moscow News Russia / Poland   Date: 31 August, 2005   An opinion poll conducted by VTsIOM in mid-August showed that Russians do not regard the events of August 1991 as a triumph of democracy. Only 13% of the respondents said that if they could return to those days, they would give their backing to Boris Yeltsin. 18% said they would support the GKChP while 69% would stay away from the fight. Only 11% of the respondents believe those August events to have represented the triumph of democracy, which put an end to the ruling establishment of the CPSU. Three times as many respondents were certain that August 1991 was a tragedy that has had fatal consequences for the country.   It is perfectly clear that every passing year sees a decrease in the number of those who support such Russian liberals as Gaidar and Chubais. Yet there is no doubt that if the poll concerned the need for the nation to observe fundamental democratic rights and liberties, then the majority of Russians would declare for these freedoms. While the citizenry are unlikely to be against political liberalism, they definitely do not accept a liberal market economy and spiritual profanation of a pseudo-free society, which nullifies the country's traditions, history, and culture.   Under these circumstances, victory in the next elections will be won by those leaders who succeed in combining political liberalism with a socially oriented economy and moderate nationalism in the sphere of culture and spirit. One cannot help agreeing with Russia's most famous prisoner, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who recently prophesied a communist victory in the next elections.   In any case, it is already clear now that a pro-Western development path - based as it is on cupidity and aggressive self-expression - has proved to be unacceptable to the majority of Russians. Such popular attitudes are also observed in China, and considering that the United States and its allies have antagonized the entire Islamic world, one can presume that the geopolitical situation on our planet could make a sharp turn in the near future. The West, which won the Cold War some 15 years ago, has squandered all the dividends it gained from that victory.   31 Aug. 2005   "Lech Walesa 25 Years Later", by Valery Masterov (The Moscow News - Warsaw bureau)   Twenty-five years ago, Solidarity, the movement that brought down the Communist system in Eastern Europe, was born   On August 31, 1980, an agreement was signed at the strikebound Lenin shipyard in Gdansk, Ploland - by Lech Walesa, an electrician and head of the shipyard strike committee; and Mieczyslaw Jagielski, deputy prime minister and chairman of a special government commission. Thus, the authorities almost fully accepted the 21 demands by the striking workers that are today inscribed on the shipyard's front gate, including the recognition of independent labor unions, the right to strike, the freeing of political prisoners and democratic opposition activists, and the abolition of censorship. The principal political force at that time - the Polish United Workers' Party (PURP) - could not but give in: Working people throughout Poland had shown solidarity with the shipyard workers.   Solidarity's triumph lasted for 16 months. On December 13, 1981, martial law was introduced, while the most active dissidents were interned or jailed. Solidarity was banned, but the wall of the authoritarian system had been breached.   Poland is preparing for the upcoming Solidarity jubilee on a grand scale. Not everything is going smooth, however. The preparations are accompanied by a good measure of controversy and debate about past achievements, the guest list, and the status of certain personalities. Solidarity itself is also divided: Former associates have now become political opponents. According to the Polityka weekly, "Solidarity's political victory left a bitter aftertaste: We acquired freedom but lost solidarity."   The honors committee for the celebration of Solidarity's 25th anniversary is headed by Lech Walesa, the legend of the public movement that rallied 10 million people and former president of Poland who is now actively promoting democratic experience from public platforms and rostrums abroad. He is still as unpredictable and contradictory as before. Once again, Walesa has stirred up the hornet's nest: He invited President Aleksander Kwasniewski, his one-time sworn enemy, to the celebrations in Gdansk; he appeared in a television debate with Gen. Wojciech Jaruzelski, the butcher of Solidarity, and indicated that he was closely watching the hustle and bustle around the presidential office (a presidential election is to take place on October 9).   We talked with Lech Walesa in Gdansk, where every street these days is reminiscent of Solidarity, while the local theater, Wybrzeze, is putting on a production with my interlocutor as the central character.   There has been so much of you on the stage, television, in the cinema, and even in comic strips that malicious tongues are saying: "Walesa is becoming a new mass culture icon." Does this bother you?   Ill-wishers have only hardened me. As for the fact that the Solidarity jubilee is getting broad media coverage and even exposure to the arts, one should only be happy about this. It is important that people, especially young people, know that a quarter century ago we were fighting not only for better living standards and full shelves in the shops but also for freedom of expression and civil society.   What made victory possible in August 1980?   We already had some experience in fighting. Ten years before that, we had taken to the streets, ending up defenseless before the ruling authorities which were armed to the teeth. There were bloody clashes, and about 40 strikers were killed. College and university students were also on strike. But what kind of spin did the authorities put on that? They said it was the lazy and idlers, those who did not want to work or study who were protesting. I managed to unite millions of people of different trades and professions. It was no longer about anarchists or punks, but about an organized struggle directed from a single center.   You are accused of believing the "Solidarity equals Walesa" myth. Is this really so?   I was a blue collar worker, hence my public credibility. Yet those who have achieved much are dogged by envy. They accuse me of ruling like a dictator. Otherwise we would have lost. I was responsible for everything. I was supported by the masses and I won with their support. The drama is that these masses had to pay too high a price.   But maybe the Solidarity myth did not justify itself in a free market environment?   I counted on two presidential terms to translate all of our demands into reality. I proposed a presidential system of governance, a different privatization program - 100 million to everyone, a new-generation Marshall Plan, various decrees, etc. But I lost the second election and failed to carry through all of my plans. I ended up as hostage to past successes - and to my own self. Of the once multi-million strong Solidarity, about 700,000 members have remained today.   But Solidarity keeps fighting: Shipyard workers demand an investigation into the purportedly illegal sell-off of the shipyard, and coal miners and railroad workers are also on strike.   I am ashamed that the democracy we were fighting for has led to this: MPs and government ministers are stealing millions, while working-class people are starving.   Do you agree with those lamenting the fact that the war with Walesa is turning into Walesa's war with Solidarity?   I am at war with Solidarity? It has simply become different - not bad or unviable. Today it is better educated and better suited for the 21st century; it knows how to talk to the capitalists and come to agreement with them. Meanwhile, I am intrinsically a revolutionary. So today's Solidarity is not to my liking. At the same time, I do not want to be a ceremonial bystander. So after the jubilee celebrations, I will quit Solidarity.   Nonetheless, you have issued a challenge to presidential candidates, saying: "I am going to fight. I am disappointed with what is going on in politics." Now, what is it that you do not like?   All of this claptrap around secondary, inconsequential matters: who should be stripped of his perks or whose case should be made public. I am raising signatures and I feel mobilized. But there is no way I can stand up to the demagoguery of the Kaczynski brothers or the flag-wavers from the League of Polish Families. I will see what the lineup is going to be in the run-up to the presidential election. If I see that I can count on support, this could make a difference. I will be under steam, ready to jump in until the very last moment.   Division among your former associates, who in their internal squabbles are also lashing out at you, is staggering. Or is it true that the Walesa legend has outgrown Walesa himself?   All of these disputes arise from the prevailing situation. Today, very little depends on Polish politicians. Once everything hinged on the Soviets, but now everything depends on the West. We went out of our way to get there, but now Brussels keeps making one demand after another - damn it! Now, try to offer the electorate a program if it has to be approved by some external force. Internal struggles get personal, destroying reputations. It is lamentable that sleaze, compromising material, based above all on state security archives, is becoming the main weapon here.   What is your opinion about the introduction of martial law?   The communist regime had zero tolerance for Solidarity because it did not fit into the system. Had I been in Jaruzelski's shoes, I would have come to terms with Walesa and joined European structures, expecting the Polish example to be emulated by other countries. But the general arrested us, and it is extremely difficult to carry out transparent reform with such an encumbrance. Ten years went down the drain.   You once said that you had pulled out the first stone from the Berlin Wall. Yet for some reason everyone forgot about Solidarity's second advent which brought into office the first non-Communist government in Eastern Europe following the 1989 elections.   This is price for the leadership. We knocked out the bear's teeth. That came before the collapse of the Berlin Wall or the "velvet revolution" in Czechoslovakia. But even prior to that, a Pole had become a pope who then came to his motherland and said that there could not be a just Europe without an independent Poland. Then came Gorbachev with his perestroika and glasnost. Talking about the contribution to the demolition of the Communist system, John Paul II should take 50 percent of the credit for that, Lech Walesa and Solidarity, 30 percent. The rest can be divided among others, including Boris Yeltsin. Had he not put down the putsch and then extracted Russia from the Soviet Union, the process could have dragged on for a very long time.   Color revolutions in FSU countries have been called a new Solidarity era. How much reality and how much symbolism is there in this?   I went to Ukraine, but I did not wear an orange jersey. The question is whether people who have risen from their political slumber will manage to ensure real democracy or let one oligarchy to be replaced by another. It seems that the new Ukrainian authorities are already acting up. So I supported freedom, not personalities. The people will have a chance when they can take part in the division of national wealth and get to control the ruling authority. The world today, like Lego cubes, has some basic dimensions: freedom, democracy, pluralism, freedom of religion, and a free market environment. When these cubes do not match each other, relations aggravate. I am very interested in seeing our neighbors - Russia, Belarus and Ukraine - have as many matching dimensions as possible.   Obviously there is a shortage of matching parameters in Russian-Polish relations.   We are acting foolishly. That's all I can say. When I was president, I thought we would have wonderful relations with Russia. Unfortunately, that did not happen. We keep arguing and quarreling, while third forces are taking advantage of this. The more we quarrel, the more we - both you and us - let the West benefit from our quarrels. If we do not understand this and do not cooperate, we will become a laughing stock and an easy mark for others.
	View more stories