OPPOSITION TO UNITED STATES FOREIGN POLICY
- + Add to Faves
- + Translate
- + Share
العربية
ä¸å›½
Français
Deutsch
Ελληνική
हिनà¥à¤¦à¥€
Italiano
日本語
Português
РуÑÑкий
Español
(Redirected from Opposition to U.S. foreign policy)
The United States of America has intervened in the affairs of numerous governments and countries, which often has led to long-lived anti-American sentiments,[1] not only in those nations, but also in those which feel threatened by the US. In Canada, for example, anti-American sentiment was strengthened by the War of 1812.
The scope and scale of interference in the affairs of other countries itself has angered many.[2][3][4][5] It was often perceived as an illegitimate interference with the politics of other countries, often with a hegemonic attitude, particularly in Latin America and the Philippines (Philippine-American War, Ferdinand Marcos).
The U.S. has, or is alleged to has, supported anti-communist governments, coups, insurgent movements and dictatorships in Latin America - see Guatemala, Honduras with John Negroponte,[6] the Chilean coup of 1973CIA 2000 report (Summary of Responses to Questions, 2.A) published by National Security Archives and Operation Condor.[7] The US provided significant support for Augusto Pinochet in Chile, who came into power in the Chilean coup and went on to commit many human rights abuses. The role of the Central Intelligence Agency in this context is the subject of fierce debate. It has also been alleged that the CIA was involved with the military coups in Brazil,[8] Argentina and Uruguay, including military training in torture skills and political intervention.[9]
The official American government view is that American influence and interference in Latin American countries was necessary to stop the spread of communism. Others, especially on the left, charge that America's main primary interest was economic, and that it was willing to do anything to further American corporate interests in the region.
The U.S. was responsible for arming and training the Atlacatl Battalion in El Salvador. They were responsible for the rape, torture, mutilation, and murder of civilians, including children. A famous example of this was the El Mozote massacre. When word of this massacre got out, it was dismissed by the U.S. government as communist propaganda. In 1992, the United Nation Truth Commission investigated the site of the massacre and found 143 skeletons, including 131 children under the age of twelve. The ammunition found around the site of the massacre was manufactured in Lake City.
Shortly after the massacre, Ronald Reagan signed Congress's amendment of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, which said the El Salvadoran government "is making a concerted and significant effort to comply with internationally recognized human rights" and "is achieving substantial control over all elements of its own armed forces, so as to bring to an end the indiscriminate torture and murder of Salvadoran citizens by these forces."[10]
America has a history of supplying funds for paramilitary groups that are called freedom fighters by the donors and their allies, but are regarded as extremists or terrorists by their opponents. Such funding may be provided by the government, by private citizens, or by a combination of the two. The Contras in Nicaragua are an example of this.
America's role in the Vietnam War also created extensive anti-American sentiment in many countries because of the massive civilian casualties. During this war, the U.S. conducted massive bombing campaigns against Cambodia. This contributed to the approximately half a million civilians killed in the war from all causes.[11] Documents released by the Clinton Administration reveal at least 2,756,941 tons of ordinance was dropped in Cambodia.[12] Similarly, the use of the atomic bombs at the end of World War II in Hiroshima and Nagasaki remains controversial. They also used chemicals for deforestation that had devastating long-term environmental effects (see Agent Orange).
American support for the military dictatorship of George Papadopoulos in Greece (1967-1974),[13] which compelled many prominent Greeks to flee Greece, has been a source of bad will across Europe. It is often held to have contributed to the split in North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Union over the US-led invasion of Iraq.
The United States was also criticized for meddling in the internal politics of some of its democratic allies. For instance, the US government funded some French unions through the National Endowment for Democracy, including some with links to far-right violent groups.[14]
The CIA was involved in the overthrow of the Iran's democratically elected Premier Mohammed Mossadegh, due to his policy of nationalizing Iran's oil, increasingly autocratic rule (he had dissolved the parliament), and fear of a Communist takeover.[15]
It is interesting to note that the friendly relations between Saddam Hussein and the United States also soured when Saddam Hussein nationalized Iraq's oil.
Similarly, the CIA attempted to overthrow Hugo Chavez after he nationalized it's oil industry and other foreign investments.
The CIA tried to assassinate democratically elected prime minister, Patrice Lumumba of the Democratic Republic of the Congo[16] after he nationalized the copper mines of Congo, and he was eventually killed by forces led by Joseph Mobutu, who was supported by the U.S.
The US has supported the brutal and barbaric regimes that have controlled Saudi Arabia and Turkey[17][18]. Both nations have serious human rights records[19] [20][21] but the United States has provided weapons and intelligence to both countries, which has led to the arrest, torture and execution of political dissidents.
Critics also claim that the United States supported Afghan mujahedin forces during that country's occupation by the Soviet Union but later fought against them. Others point out that the mujahedin Afghan Northern Alliance was America's ally against the Taliban. (See War in Afghanistan (2001–present)).
The CIA has been involved in the use of right-wing or pro-American death squads since the Vietnam War. The Phoenix Program involved the use of both CIA and Vietnamese death squads that targeted Vietnamese thought to be supporting the Viet Cong. The CIA estimates that over 19,000 Vietnamese were killed through assassination or in the process of torture.Valentine,Douglas,The Phoenix Program.
Another cause of resentment against America in the Middle East is that America supports regimes in many Middle-Eastern countries such as Egypt,[22] Saudi Arabia,[17] and Jordan, that are unpopular with many[24][25][26] people in those countries, and are seen as oppressive and tyrannical.
The 2002 Venezuelan coup d'état attempt, taking place long after the collapse of the Soviet Union, are by some as confirmation of this view of US policy.[27] It was done by groups that included those, such as labor groups, that had received hundreds of thousands of dollars by the US National Endowment for Democracy. The State Dept's human rights bureau was in 2002 (year of the source) examining whether one or more recipients of money may have actively plotted against Chavez.[27]
Some also claim that America has used the veto power in the United Nations Security Council more often than any other country. (However, overall it is actually USSR/Russia who has done this.)[29] Since shortly before the fall of the USSR, the United States has been the most frequent user of the veto.
It is also held against the United States that it refuses to sign the United Nations convention agreement from 1980 banning the use of napalm and other incendiaries against civilian populations. The same holds for the Ottawa Treaty from 1999 outlawing the use, production, stockpiling and trade in anti-personnel landmines.
Another example of the inconsistency of United States foreign policy may be found in the U.S.'s relationship with two Communist countries: Cuba and China. While the United States continues to maintain an economic embargo against Cuba (that includes restraining United States citizens from visiting the country in most cases), the U.S. participates in full, normal trade relations with China.
Some believe that America is not always as committed to free trade as it professes to be.
The introduction of tariffs on steel imports in March 2002 was seen by many people[30][31] outside the US as an instance of America failing to practice what it preaches in terms of free trade. Along with other western countries the United States evades free trade rules using non-tariff barriers to trade, such as antidumping and countervailing duties, and subsidizes its agricultural and textile markets while pressurizing poor countries to open up their markets to the West without any reciprocal trade agreements. A common argument is that subsidized American food exports are artificially cheap, making it impossible to compete against them in world markets, thus causing third world economies harm.
A long-standing irritant in relations between the United States and its neighbor Canada was the United States-Canada softwood lumber dispute. There is now an agreement.
The continuing embargo against Cuba is seen by a broad range of people as vindictive - and hypocritical in the face of mainland China retaining most favored nation trading status. In 1996 the U.S. passed the Helms-Burton Act, which included a controversial provision which, roughly, allows lawsuits against foreigners who do business with Cuban companies which use American property nationalized in the 1959 Cuban Revolution. Some saw this as an offense against other nations' sovereignty and a violation of World Trade Organization rules. And while President Clinton suspended the lawsuit portion of that act, and President Bush has continued its suspension, the act's mere existence is offensive to many.
The US government annually certifies whether other countries cooperate in its War On Drugs; countries which are judged uncooperative are sanctioned economically and diplomatically. This annual review is seen as offensive by many foreign countries, most notably by Mexico.
The United States has been accused of tacitly approving the sales by US manufacturers of precursors to chemical and biological weapons, to the regime of Saddam Hussein, [32] [33] [27](as were several European countries) during the war against Iran, America's chief enemy in the Middle East at that time, in the 1980s. In 1985, the US House of Representatives passed a bill to reinsert Iraq into the State Departments list of terrorism supporters, but Reagan's Secretary of State, George Schultz, convinced the bill's sponsor to drop the bill.[35] When the Senate passed a bill (the Prevention of Genocide Act) to condemn the Iraqi use of poison gas against Kurds, then-president Ronald Reagan threatened to veto the bill if it passed the House.[36][37] The US is also accused of providing Iraq with critical battle planning assistance at time when US intelligence agencies knew Iraqi commanders would employ chemical weapons.[38] Later U.S. presidents George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush fought two wars against Iraq (Gulf War and 2003 Invasion of Iraq), once to liberate Kuwait from Iraqi occupation, said war being expressly approved by the UN Security Council, and the second, allegedly over "weapons of mass destruction" which Iraq was accused of possessing. Critics of the 2003 Invasion of Iraq note that the second war and subsequent occupation was not the result of Iraqi provocation; and the Bush Administration's contentions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction have not turned out to be true as of September 2nd, 2007, over four years after the start of the pre-emptive invasion and occupation. Few deny that Iraq once possessed chemical and biological weapons; the Reagan Administration certainly supplied Iraq with the precursors for such weapons, and the use of chemical weapons by Iraq, and later Iran, in the Iran-Iraq War as well as against Iraq's Kurdish citizens is a matter of historical record; however, those opposed to George W. Bush's claims that Iraq still maintained WMDs up until the March 2003 invasion insist--and the record shows--that Iraq abandoned its weapons program in the years following the Gulf War, as a result of international pressure and weapons inspections (and the discovery of Iraq's secret biological weapons program).
Many criticize the United States (especially over the past two decades) for its stance on many arms control instruments, including, but not limited to, withdrawing from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, not signing the Small Arms Treaty, signing but not ratifying the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, not signing the anti-personnel landmine banning Ottawa Treaty, as well as its refusal to negotiate a verifiability protocol for the Biological Weapons Convention, which it has signed and ratified. It is also known to hold the world's largest arsenal of operational nuclear weapons, and there are current attempts by the Bush Administration (see the Nuclear Bunker Buster and the Reliable Replacement Warhead) to develop new varieties of nuclear weapons, though their prospects for funding or support by the US public or in the US Congress are slim to none.
Some accuse the US of hypocrisy in its campaigns against attempts to build weapons of mass destruction by countries such as Iran and North Korea while ignoring similar alleged programs by Israel, India, and Pakistan; certain non-nuclear weapons states (under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty) consider these and other US efforts to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons to be a thinly veiled attempt to maintain its military advantage. The US counters that Israel, India and Pakistan have never signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and are thus not bound by it; all other world states have signed it, including Iran and North Korea (although North Korea has since withdrawn) and are so bound. Other states--including many US allies--are concerned about the Bush Administration's reluctance to discuss concrete measures and timelines to bring about the implementation of Article VI of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which specifies that the nuclear weapons states have an obligation to work towards and negotiate destruction of their nuclear weapons and global nuclear disarmament. The US and most Western countries counter that anti-proliferation efforts benefit all because proliferation is likely to destabilize many regions and increase the probability of nuclear war, which would be incredibly devastating for all, including poor countries.
The government of the People's Republic of China resents US involvement in its internal affairs. For example, US arms sales (of allegedly defensive weapons) to the Taiwan and its involvement in the determination of the status of Taiwan has been seen as offensive by the PRC government. The US counters that the government of Taiwan is free, democratic, and representative of the people living in Taiwan, and the US has a moral and legal obligation (see the Taiwan Relations Act) to support democratic governments, and to allow the PRC to extend its political control to the island of Taiwan (without the consent of the Taiwanese people and their democratically-elected representatives) would be the imposition of a dictatorship on the Taiwanese people. The PRC also has a conflict with the U.S. government because it criticizes the situation with regard to PRC human rights practices (see United States' Country Reports on Human Rights Practices). The PRC accuses the US of ignoring its issues with its own human rights policies in its response to the US criticisms. The US counters that it welcomes foreign and domestic criticism of its own human rights practices; criticism by the PRC is welcomed, as it will certainly point out human rights violations to be dealt with, as well as being completely compatible with the concept of reciprocity between sovereign states.
Even a close ally like the United Kingdom has been the target of such action: there is a long history of Americans openly raising funds for both the Provisional Irish Republican Army and the Real Irish Republican Army. Funds for these groups are commonly raised by Irish-Americans, who feel a patriotic sense of involvement in The Troubles in Northern Ireland.
The US and the British were the first to come up with the concept of using Islamic fundamentalism as a weapon against the Soviet Union. The CIA provided funding to the Muslim Brotherhood which worked with the CIA to assassinate Arab communists inside various Arab countries. The CIA provided covert support to the Chechen terrorists and to the Mujahadeen Islamic jihadists[39] in Afghanistan including Osama Bin Ladin. There are some allegations in Russia "that the west itself is somehow behind the Chechen rebellion".[40]
Another major cause of anti-American sentiment, especially in the Muslim world, is what many people around the world see as "America's blind support for Israel."
American intervention in the Arab-Israeli conflict is seen by some as being unfair and biased towards Israel and against the Palestinians.
US vetos in the UN Security Council have often prevented UN action against Israel.Some people complain that America is quick to criticize Palestinian terror attacks against Israelis, but usually turns a blind eye towards attacks by the Israeli army against Palestinians, and refuses to criticize Israeli wrongdoings. Defenders argue that while civilian casualties are unfortunate, most of Israel's attacks on Palestinians target militants and terrorist strongholds, while Palestinian attacks on Israel deliberately target civilians. This issue causes huge anger and resentment against America throughout the world, especially the Muslim world, who believe that America is propping up Israeli military tyranny against Muslims. The U.S. government maintains that democratic Israel has been a helpful and strategic ally.
There is also a widespread belief in the Muslim world that America's support for Israel is motivated by a racist bias against Arabs, Fundamentalist Christian bias against Islam, or that the American government is controlled by Zionists.
To exacerbate matters, George W. Bush at one point used the word ''crusade'' to characterize his war on terrorism. This provoked among many Muslims an association with the Crusades of the Middle-Ages, and Bush later specified that he was using the word in its broader sense and not to refer to a religious war.
While such opposition is ubiquitous among Arabs and Muslims, most Americans tend to sympathize with Israel. In addition, American politicians are largely supportive of Israel's efforts.
During the Cold War, the alternatives seemed often to be a communist regime or a right-wing dictatorship. Considering the many who were killed in communist dictatorships, the right-wing one has been seen as the lesser evil.[41]
Niall Ferguson argues that the US is incorrectly blamed for many human rights violations in nations they have supported. According to him the US cannot credibly be blamed for all the 200,000 deaths during the long civil war in Guatemala.[41] The US Intelligence Oversight Board[43] points out that military aid was cut for long periods because of such violations, that the US helped stop a coup in 1993, and that efforts were made to improve the conduct of the security services.
One reason for the support, by the US and other Western nations, for certain right-wing dictatorships is that it is rare for democracy to exist in nations with low economic development. In these nations the population often lack literacy, education, and are otherwise too poor to be be able to fully participate in a democratic process. Thus, supporting a dictatorship that promotes economic growth have often been seen as the best option available, anticipating that this will eventually lead to democratization. Right-wing dictatorships in nations such as Portugal, Spain, Greece, Turkey, Chile, Brazil, South Korea, Taiwan, Philippines, and Indonesia eventually become democracies. However, this view has been challenged recently by arguing that research shows that poor democracies perform better, including also on economic growth if excluding East Asia, than poor dictatorships. [44]
That US soldiers have committed war crimes such as rapes and killing POWs is a fact. However, such acts are not approved or supported by the US government or the US military; in fact, when such atrocities and offenses against the Geneva Conventions and the rules and articles of war are discovered, the responsible soldiers are tried, and if found guilty, they are punished according to the law, usually with long terms of imprisonment. War crimes and atrocities are not the policy of the US government. [45]
Democracies, including the United States, have killed many fewer civilians than dictatorships. [46][47][48][49]
During the age of imperialism, the US rapidly gained overseas possessions. This was influenced by theories such as the White Man's Burden and ostensibly justified by the need to help those territories develop. However, this occurred during a time period when all major powers engaged in colonialism, many with much larger overseas possessions than the US.[50]
Especially after WWII, the US has voluntarily left many of its overseas territories or occupations and they have gained independence. Cuba (1902), the Philippines (1946), South Korea (1948), West Germany (1949), Japan (1952), Austria (1955), the Panama Canal Zone (1979), the Federated States of Micronesia (1986), Marshall Islands (1986), and Palau (1994) are examples.
The United States was for much of the nineteenth century the only nation with a large franchise and a constitution giving its citizens far-reaching rights and liberties. As such, it served as an inspiration for democratic movements around the world, such as the Revolutions of 1848.[51]
The United States helped the democracies in Europe survive the First World War, played an instrumental role (along with France, the United Kingdom, the Republic of China, and the Soviet Union) in the defeat of the right-wing, genocidal tyrannies of Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and Imperial Japan during the Second World War, and helped the people of the totalitarian dictatorships in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe overthrow their dictators and exercise their right to democracy and self-determination.
Even though Churchill and Stalin favored the summary execution of top Nazi German leaders, Franklin Roosevelt, the President of the US at the time, insisted on giving them a fair trial. The subsequent Nuremberg Trials represented the first time that criminals against humanity were actually tried, tried fairly (several of the accused Nazis were found to be not guilty and let go free), and tried under international law; created an unquestionable historical record of the depth and scale of the Nazi genocide, aggression, and crimes against humanity; and is regarded by many as representing the first real victory of international law (and liberty under law) over the factors that had dominated international relations since time immemorial: aggression, force, fear, and the will to power. During the Second World War, the US was the driving force in getting Churchill and Stalin to agree to establish the United Nations.
Many other democracies have voluntary military alliances with United States. See NATO, Australia, Japan, the Mutual Defense Treaty between the US and South Korea, the pacts between the US and Israel, and arrangements between the US and other Major Non-NATO Allies.
Those nations with military alliances with the US can spend less on their militaries since they can count on US protection. This may give the impression that the US is less peaceful than those nations.[52][53]
1. 'Listen more' is world's message to US
2. South Korean Police Keep Anti-US Protest Peaceful
3. Anti-U.S. protest in Jakarta
4. Anti-US protest in Kabul
5. http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSL0327016920070603?feedType=RSS
6. Nomination of John Negroponte
7. Operation Condor: Cable Suggests U.S. Role
8. http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/history/2004/0331coup1964.htm
9. THE SECRET WARS OF THE CIA Lecture by John Stockwell 1987. ''"Dan Metrione, the famous exponent of these things, did 7 years in Brazil and 3 in Uruguay, teaching interrogation, teaching torture."''
10. The Truth of El Mozote, , Mark, Danner, The New Yorker, 1993
11. http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat2.htm#Vietnam
12. http://japanfocus.org/products/topdf/2420
13. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,903399-2,00.html
14. http://www.cato.org/pubs/fpbriefs/fpb-027.html
15. Country Studies: Iran:Chapter 1 - Historical Setting:MOSSADEQ AND OIL NATIONALIZATION
16. Interim Report: Alleged Assassination Plots Involving Foreign Leaders, Church Committee, , , U.S. Government Printing Office, 1975, Report No. 94-465
17. http://www.opencrs.com/document/IB93113/2001-04-13%2000:00:00
18. http://www.fas.org/asmp/profiles/turkey_fmschart.htm
19. http://www.coe.int/T/E/Com/About_Coe/Member_states/e_tu.asp#TopOfPage
20. http://www.hrw.org/reports/1997/saudi/Saudi-01.htm#P46_1029
21. http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2001/nea/8296.htm
22. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A53129-2004Jul15.html
23. http://www.opencrs.com/document/IB93113/2001-04-13%2000:00:00
24. http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F40D1EF63D540C7B8DDDA10894DE494D81&n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fPeople%2fH%2fHussein%20I
25. http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2006-04/2006-04-20-voa27.cfm?CFID=87517322&CFTOKEN=62903125
26. http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal/1997/issue2/jv1n2a8.html
27.
28.
29. Veto database and information at Global Policy Forum
30. http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1237
31. http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/hansart.nsf/V3Key/LC20020312067
32. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A52241-2002Dec29
33. http://foi.missouri.edu/terrorbkgd/following.html
34.
35. http://www.ithaca.edu/gagnon/talks/us-iraq.htm
36. http://www-tech.mit.edu/V124/N40/awyne40.40c.html
37. http://observer.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,,784313,00.html
38. http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20911FA38590C7B8DDDA10894DA404482
39. Maktab al-Khidamat; www.globalsecurity.org
40. http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1299318,00.html
41. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/12/11/do1102.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2005/12/11/ixopinion.html
42. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/12/11/do1102.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2005/12/11/ixopinion.html
43. http://www.ciponline.org/iob.htm Report on the Guatemala Review, Intelligence Oversight Board. June 28, 1996.
44. http://www.cceia.org/resources/transcripts/5129.html
45. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode10/usc_sup_01_10_10_A_20_II_30_47.html
46. http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE1.HTM
47. http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.FIG23.4.GIF
48. http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/POWER.FIG2.GIF
49. http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/inscr/genocide/
50. http://www.wpunj.edu/~history/study/ws2/set10b.htm
51. http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/paper/fortescue.html
52. http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9266967
53. http://www.japantoday.com/jp/news/407850/all
★ American terrorism
★ Extraordinary rendition
★ Unlawful combatant
★ Anti-americanism
★ Anti-imperialism
★ Manifest Destiny
★ Human rights in the United States
★ How the world sees america
The United States of America has intervened in the affairs of numerous governments and countries, which often has led to long-lived anti-American sentiments,[1] not only in those nations, but also in those which feel threatened by the US. In Canada, for example, anti-American sentiment was strengthened by the War of 1812.
The scope and scale of interference in the affairs of other countries itself has angered many.[2][3][4][5] It was often perceived as an illegitimate interference with the politics of other countries, often with a hegemonic attitude, particularly in Latin America and the Philippines (Philippine-American War, Ferdinand Marcos).
Cold War
Latin America
The U.S. has, or is alleged to has, supported anti-communist governments, coups, insurgent movements and dictatorships in Latin America - see Guatemala, Honduras with John Negroponte,[6] the Chilean coup of 1973CIA 2000 report (Summary of Responses to Questions, 2.A) published by National Security Archives and Operation Condor.[7] The US provided significant support for Augusto Pinochet in Chile, who came into power in the Chilean coup and went on to commit many human rights abuses. The role of the Central Intelligence Agency in this context is the subject of fierce debate. It has also been alleged that the CIA was involved with the military coups in Brazil,[8] Argentina and Uruguay, including military training in torture skills and political intervention.[9]
The official American government view is that American influence and interference in Latin American countries was necessary to stop the spread of communism. Others, especially on the left, charge that America's main primary interest was economic, and that it was willing to do anything to further American corporate interests in the region.
The U.S. was responsible for arming and training the Atlacatl Battalion in El Salvador. They were responsible for the rape, torture, mutilation, and murder of civilians, including children. A famous example of this was the El Mozote massacre. When word of this massacre got out, it was dismissed by the U.S. government as communist propaganda. In 1992, the United Nation Truth Commission investigated the site of the massacre and found 143 skeletons, including 131 children under the age of twelve. The ammunition found around the site of the massacre was manufactured in Lake City.
Shortly after the massacre, Ronald Reagan signed Congress's amendment of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, which said the El Salvadoran government "is making a concerted and significant effort to comply with internationally recognized human rights" and "is achieving substantial control over all elements of its own armed forces, so as to bring to an end the indiscriminate torture and murder of Salvadoran citizens by these forces."[10]
America has a history of supplying funds for paramilitary groups that are called freedom fighters by the donors and their allies, but are regarded as extremists or terrorists by their opponents. Such funding may be provided by the government, by private citizens, or by a combination of the two. The Contras in Nicaragua are an example of this.
Outside of Latin America
America's role in the Vietnam War also created extensive anti-American sentiment in many countries because of the massive civilian casualties. During this war, the U.S. conducted massive bombing campaigns against Cambodia. This contributed to the approximately half a million civilians killed in the war from all causes.[11] Documents released by the Clinton Administration reveal at least 2,756,941 tons of ordinance was dropped in Cambodia.[12] Similarly, the use of the atomic bombs at the end of World War II in Hiroshima and Nagasaki remains controversial. They also used chemicals for deforestation that had devastating long-term environmental effects (see Agent Orange).
American support for the military dictatorship of George Papadopoulos in Greece (1967-1974),[13] which compelled many prominent Greeks to flee Greece, has been a source of bad will across Europe. It is often held to have contributed to the split in North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Union over the US-led invasion of Iraq.
The United States was also criticized for meddling in the internal politics of some of its democratic allies. For instance, the US government funded some French unions through the National Endowment for Democracy, including some with links to far-right violent groups.[14]
The CIA was involved in the overthrow of the Iran's democratically elected Premier Mohammed Mossadegh, due to his policy of nationalizing Iran's oil, increasingly autocratic rule (he had dissolved the parliament), and fear of a Communist takeover.[15]
It is interesting to note that the friendly relations between Saddam Hussein and the United States also soured when Saddam Hussein nationalized Iraq's oil.
Similarly, the CIA attempted to overthrow Hugo Chavez after he nationalized it's oil industry and other foreign investments.
The CIA tried to assassinate democratically elected prime minister, Patrice Lumumba of the Democratic Republic of the Congo[16] after he nationalized the copper mines of Congo, and he was eventually killed by forces led by Joseph Mobutu, who was supported by the U.S.
The US has supported the brutal and barbaric regimes that have controlled Saudi Arabia and Turkey[17][18]. Both nations have serious human rights records[19] [20][21] but the United States has provided weapons and intelligence to both countries, which has led to the arrest, torture and execution of political dissidents.
Critics also claim that the United States supported Afghan mujahedin forces during that country's occupation by the Soviet Union but later fought against them. Others point out that the mujahedin Afghan Northern Alliance was America's ally against the Taliban. (See War in Afghanistan (2001–present)).
The CIA has been involved in the use of right-wing or pro-American death squads since the Vietnam War. The Phoenix Program involved the use of both CIA and Vietnamese death squads that targeted Vietnamese thought to be supporting the Viet Cong. The CIA estimates that over 19,000 Vietnamese were killed through assassination or in the process of torture.Valentine,Douglas,The Phoenix Program.
After the Cold War
Support for dictatorships
Another cause of resentment against America in the Middle East is that America supports regimes in many Middle-Eastern countries such as Egypt,[22] Saudi Arabia,[17] and Jordan, that are unpopular with many[24][25][26] people in those countries, and are seen as oppressive and tyrannical.
The 2002 Venezuelan coup d'état attempt, taking place long after the collapse of the Soviet Union, are by some as confirmation of this view of US policy.[27] It was done by groups that included those, such as labor groups, that had received hundreds of thousands of dollars by the US National Endowment for Democracy. The State Dept's human rights bureau was in 2002 (year of the source) examining whether one or more recipients of money may have actively plotted against Chavez.[27]
International institutions
Some also claim that America has used the veto power in the United Nations Security Council more often than any other country. (However, overall it is actually USSR/Russia who has done this.)[29] Since shortly before the fall of the USSR, the United States has been the most frequent user of the veto.
It is also held against the United States that it refuses to sign the United Nations convention agreement from 1980 banning the use of napalm and other incendiaries against civilian populations. The same holds for the Ottawa Treaty from 1999 outlawing the use, production, stockpiling and trade in anti-personnel landmines.
International trade and trade embargoes
Another example of the inconsistency of United States foreign policy may be found in the U.S.'s relationship with two Communist countries: Cuba and China. While the United States continues to maintain an economic embargo against Cuba (that includes restraining United States citizens from visiting the country in most cases), the U.S. participates in full, normal trade relations with China.
Some believe that America is not always as committed to free trade as it professes to be.
The introduction of tariffs on steel imports in March 2002 was seen by many people[30][31] outside the US as an instance of America failing to practice what it preaches in terms of free trade. Along with other western countries the United States evades free trade rules using non-tariff barriers to trade, such as antidumping and countervailing duties, and subsidizes its agricultural and textile markets while pressurizing poor countries to open up their markets to the West without any reciprocal trade agreements. A common argument is that subsidized American food exports are artificially cheap, making it impossible to compete against them in world markets, thus causing third world economies harm.
A long-standing irritant in relations between the United States and its neighbor Canada was the United States-Canada softwood lumber dispute. There is now an agreement.
The continuing embargo against Cuba is seen by a broad range of people as vindictive - and hypocritical in the face of mainland China retaining most favored nation trading status. In 1996 the U.S. passed the Helms-Burton Act, which included a controversial provision which, roughly, allows lawsuits against foreigners who do business with Cuban companies which use American property nationalized in the 1959 Cuban Revolution. Some saw this as an offense against other nations' sovereignty and a violation of World Trade Organization rules. And while President Clinton suspended the lawsuit portion of that act, and President Bush has continued its suspension, the act's mere existence is offensive to many.
The US government annually certifies whether other countries cooperate in its War On Drugs; countries which are judged uncooperative are sanctioned economically and diplomatically. This annual review is seen as offensive by many foreign countries, most notably by Mexico.
Arms trade and anti-proliferation measures
The United States has been accused of tacitly approving the sales by US manufacturers of precursors to chemical and biological weapons, to the regime of Saddam Hussein, [32] [33] [27](as were several European countries) during the war against Iran, America's chief enemy in the Middle East at that time, in the 1980s. In 1985, the US House of Representatives passed a bill to reinsert Iraq into the State Departments list of terrorism supporters, but Reagan's Secretary of State, George Schultz, convinced the bill's sponsor to drop the bill.[35] When the Senate passed a bill (the Prevention of Genocide Act) to condemn the Iraqi use of poison gas against Kurds, then-president Ronald Reagan threatened to veto the bill if it passed the House.[36][37] The US is also accused of providing Iraq with critical battle planning assistance at time when US intelligence agencies knew Iraqi commanders would employ chemical weapons.[38] Later U.S. presidents George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush fought two wars against Iraq (Gulf War and 2003 Invasion of Iraq), once to liberate Kuwait from Iraqi occupation, said war being expressly approved by the UN Security Council, and the second, allegedly over "weapons of mass destruction" which Iraq was accused of possessing. Critics of the 2003 Invasion of Iraq note that the second war and subsequent occupation was not the result of Iraqi provocation; and the Bush Administration's contentions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction have not turned out to be true as of September 2nd, 2007, over four years after the start of the pre-emptive invasion and occupation. Few deny that Iraq once possessed chemical and biological weapons; the Reagan Administration certainly supplied Iraq with the precursors for such weapons, and the use of chemical weapons by Iraq, and later Iran, in the Iran-Iraq War as well as against Iraq's Kurdish citizens is a matter of historical record; however, those opposed to George W. Bush's claims that Iraq still maintained WMDs up until the March 2003 invasion insist--and the record shows--that Iraq abandoned its weapons program in the years following the Gulf War, as a result of international pressure and weapons inspections (and the discovery of Iraq's secret biological weapons program).
Many criticize the United States (especially over the past two decades) for its stance on many arms control instruments, including, but not limited to, withdrawing from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, not signing the Small Arms Treaty, signing but not ratifying the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, not signing the anti-personnel landmine banning Ottawa Treaty, as well as its refusal to negotiate a verifiability protocol for the Biological Weapons Convention, which it has signed and ratified. It is also known to hold the world's largest arsenal of operational nuclear weapons, and there are current attempts by the Bush Administration (see the Nuclear Bunker Buster and the Reliable Replacement Warhead) to develop new varieties of nuclear weapons, though their prospects for funding or support by the US public or in the US Congress are slim to none.
Some accuse the US of hypocrisy in its campaigns against attempts to build weapons of mass destruction by countries such as Iran and North Korea while ignoring similar alleged programs by Israel, India, and Pakistan; certain non-nuclear weapons states (under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty) consider these and other US efforts to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons to be a thinly veiled attempt to maintain its military advantage. The US counters that Israel, India and Pakistan have never signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and are thus not bound by it; all other world states have signed it, including Iran and North Korea (although North Korea has since withdrawn) and are so bound. Other states--including many US allies--are concerned about the Bush Administration's reluctance to discuss concrete measures and timelines to bring about the implementation of Article VI of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which specifies that the nuclear weapons states have an obligation to work towards and negotiate destruction of their nuclear weapons and global nuclear disarmament. The US and most Western countries counter that anti-proliferation efforts benefit all because proliferation is likely to destabilize many regions and increase the probability of nuclear war, which would be incredibly devastating for all, including poor countries.
Criticism by the People's Republic of China
The government of the People's Republic of China resents US involvement in its internal affairs. For example, US arms sales (of allegedly defensive weapons) to the Taiwan and its involvement in the determination of the status of Taiwan has been seen as offensive by the PRC government. The US counters that the government of Taiwan is free, democratic, and representative of the people living in Taiwan, and the US has a moral and legal obligation (see the Taiwan Relations Act) to support democratic governments, and to allow the PRC to extend its political control to the island of Taiwan (without the consent of the Taiwanese people and their democratically-elected representatives) would be the imposition of a dictatorship on the Taiwanese people. The PRC also has a conflict with the U.S. government because it criticizes the situation with regard to PRC human rights practices (see United States' Country Reports on Human Rights Practices). The PRC accuses the US of ignoring its issues with its own human rights policies in its response to the US criticisms. The US counters that it welcomes foreign and domestic criticism of its own human rights practices; criticism by the PRC is welcomed, as it will certainly point out human rights violations to be dealt with, as well as being completely compatible with the concept of reciprocity between sovereign states.
American funding of paramilitary groups
Even a close ally like the United Kingdom has been the target of such action: there is a long history of Americans openly raising funds for both the Provisional Irish Republican Army and the Real Irish Republican Army. Funds for these groups are commonly raised by Irish-Americans, who feel a patriotic sense of involvement in The Troubles in Northern Ireland.
The US and the British were the first to come up with the concept of using Islamic fundamentalism as a weapon against the Soviet Union. The CIA provided funding to the Muslim Brotherhood which worked with the CIA to assassinate Arab communists inside various Arab countries. The CIA provided covert support to the Chechen terrorists and to the Mujahadeen Islamic jihadists[39] in Afghanistan including Osama Bin Ladin. There are some allegations in Russia "that the west itself is somehow behind the Chechen rebellion".[40]
Relationship with Israel
Another major cause of anti-American sentiment, especially in the Muslim world, is what many people around the world see as "America's blind support for Israel."
American intervention in the Arab-Israeli conflict is seen by some as being unfair and biased towards Israel and against the Palestinians.
US vetos in the UN Security Council have often prevented UN action against Israel.Some people complain that America is quick to criticize Palestinian terror attacks against Israelis, but usually turns a blind eye towards attacks by the Israeli army against Palestinians, and refuses to criticize Israeli wrongdoings. Defenders argue that while civilian casualties are unfortunate, most of Israel's attacks on Palestinians target militants and terrorist strongholds, while Palestinian attacks on Israel deliberately target civilians. This issue causes huge anger and resentment against America throughout the world, especially the Muslim world, who believe that America is propping up Israeli military tyranny against Muslims. The U.S. government maintains that democratic Israel has been a helpful and strategic ally.
There is also a widespread belief in the Muslim world that America's support for Israel is motivated by a racist bias against Arabs, Fundamentalist Christian bias against Islam, or that the American government is controlled by Zionists.
To exacerbate matters, George W. Bush at one point used the word ''crusade'' to characterize his war on terrorism. This provoked among many Muslims an association with the Crusades of the Middle-Ages, and Bush later specified that he was using the word in its broader sense and not to refer to a religious war.
While such opposition is ubiquitous among Arabs and Muslims, most Americans tend to sympathize with Israel. In addition, American politicians are largely supportive of Israel's efforts.
Opposing views
During the Cold War, the alternatives seemed often to be a communist regime or a right-wing dictatorship. Considering the many who were killed in communist dictatorships, the right-wing one has been seen as the lesser evil.[41]
Niall Ferguson argues that the US is incorrectly blamed for many human rights violations in nations they have supported. According to him the US cannot credibly be blamed for all the 200,000 deaths during the long civil war in Guatemala.[41] The US Intelligence Oversight Board[43] points out that military aid was cut for long periods because of such violations, that the US helped stop a coup in 1993, and that efforts were made to improve the conduct of the security services.
One reason for the support, by the US and other Western nations, for certain right-wing dictatorships is that it is rare for democracy to exist in nations with low economic development. In these nations the population often lack literacy, education, and are otherwise too poor to be be able to fully participate in a democratic process. Thus, supporting a dictatorship that promotes economic growth have often been seen as the best option available, anticipating that this will eventually lead to democratization. Right-wing dictatorships in nations such as Portugal, Spain, Greece, Turkey, Chile, Brazil, South Korea, Taiwan, Philippines, and Indonesia eventually become democracies. However, this view has been challenged recently by arguing that research shows that poor democracies perform better, including also on economic growth if excluding East Asia, than poor dictatorships. [44]
That US soldiers have committed war crimes such as rapes and killing POWs is a fact. However, such acts are not approved or supported by the US government or the US military; in fact, when such atrocities and offenses against the Geneva Conventions and the rules and articles of war are discovered, the responsible soldiers are tried, and if found guilty, they are punished according to the law, usually with long terms of imprisonment. War crimes and atrocities are not the policy of the US government. [45]
Democracies, including the United States, have killed many fewer civilians than dictatorships. [46][47][48][49]
During the age of imperialism, the US rapidly gained overseas possessions. This was influenced by theories such as the White Man's Burden and ostensibly justified by the need to help those territories develop. However, this occurred during a time period when all major powers engaged in colonialism, many with much larger overseas possessions than the US.[50]
Especially after WWII, the US has voluntarily left many of its overseas territories or occupations and they have gained independence. Cuba (1902), the Philippines (1946), South Korea (1948), West Germany (1949), Japan (1952), Austria (1955), the Panama Canal Zone (1979), the Federated States of Micronesia (1986), Marshall Islands (1986), and Palau (1994) are examples.
The United States was for much of the nineteenth century the only nation with a large franchise and a constitution giving its citizens far-reaching rights and liberties. As such, it served as an inspiration for democratic movements around the world, such as the Revolutions of 1848.[51]
The United States helped the democracies in Europe survive the First World War, played an instrumental role (along with France, the United Kingdom, the Republic of China, and the Soviet Union) in the defeat of the right-wing, genocidal tyrannies of Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and Imperial Japan during the Second World War, and helped the people of the totalitarian dictatorships in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe overthrow their dictators and exercise their right to democracy and self-determination.
Even though Churchill and Stalin favored the summary execution of top Nazi German leaders, Franklin Roosevelt, the President of the US at the time, insisted on giving them a fair trial. The subsequent Nuremberg Trials represented the first time that criminals against humanity were actually tried, tried fairly (several of the accused Nazis were found to be not guilty and let go free), and tried under international law; created an unquestionable historical record of the depth and scale of the Nazi genocide, aggression, and crimes against humanity; and is regarded by many as representing the first real victory of international law (and liberty under law) over the factors that had dominated international relations since time immemorial: aggression, force, fear, and the will to power. During the Second World War, the US was the driving force in getting Churchill and Stalin to agree to establish the United Nations.
Many other democracies have voluntary military alliances with United States. See NATO, Australia, Japan, the Mutual Defense Treaty between the US and South Korea, the pacts between the US and Israel, and arrangements between the US and other Major Non-NATO Allies.
Those nations with military alliances with the US can spend less on their militaries since they can count on US protection. This may give the impression that the US is less peaceful than those nations.[52][53]
References
1. 'Listen more' is world's message to US
2. South Korean Police Keep Anti-US Protest Peaceful
3. Anti-U.S. protest in Jakarta
4. Anti-US protest in Kabul
5. http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSL0327016920070603?feedType=RSS
6. Nomination of John Negroponte
7. Operation Condor: Cable Suggests U.S. Role
8. http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/history/2004/0331coup1964.htm
9. THE SECRET WARS OF THE CIA Lecture by John Stockwell 1987. ''"Dan Metrione, the famous exponent of these things, did 7 years in Brazil and 3 in Uruguay, teaching interrogation, teaching torture."''
10. The Truth of El Mozote, , Mark, Danner, The New Yorker, 1993
11. http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat2.htm#Vietnam
12. http://japanfocus.org/products/topdf/2420
13. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,903399-2,00.html
14. http://www.cato.org/pubs/fpbriefs/fpb-027.html
15. Country Studies: Iran:Chapter 1 - Historical Setting:MOSSADEQ AND OIL NATIONALIZATION
16. Interim Report: Alleged Assassination Plots Involving Foreign Leaders, Church Committee, , , U.S. Government Printing Office, 1975, Report No. 94-465
17. http://www.opencrs.com/document/IB93113/2001-04-13%2000:00:00
18. http://www.fas.org/asmp/profiles/turkey_fmschart.htm
19. http://www.coe.int/T/E/Com/About_Coe/Member_states/e_tu.asp#TopOfPage
20. http://www.hrw.org/reports/1997/saudi/Saudi-01.htm#P46_1029
21. http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2001/nea/8296.htm
22. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A53129-2004Jul15.html
23. http://www.opencrs.com/document/IB93113/2001-04-13%2000:00:00
24. http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F40D1EF63D540C7B8DDDA10894DE494D81&n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fPeople%2fH%2fHussein%20I
25. http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2006-04/2006-04-20-voa27.cfm?CFID=87517322&CFTOKEN=62903125
26. http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal/1997/issue2/jv1n2a8.html
27.
28.
29. Veto database and information at Global Policy Forum
30. http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1237
31. http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/hansart.nsf/V3Key/LC20020312067
32. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A52241-2002Dec29
33. http://foi.missouri.edu/terrorbkgd/following.html
34.
35. http://www.ithaca.edu/gagnon/talks/us-iraq.htm
36. http://www-tech.mit.edu/V124/N40/awyne40.40c.html
37. http://observer.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,,784313,00.html
38. http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20911FA38590C7B8DDDA10894DA404482
39. Maktab al-Khidamat; www.globalsecurity.org
40. http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1299318,00.html
41. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/12/11/do1102.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2005/12/11/ixopinion.html
42. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/12/11/do1102.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2005/12/11/ixopinion.html
43. http://www.ciponline.org/iob.htm Report on the Guatemala Review, Intelligence Oversight Board. June 28, 1996.
44. http://www.cceia.org/resources/transcripts/5129.html
45. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode10/usc_sup_01_10_10_A_20_II_30_47.html
46. http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE1.HTM
47. http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.FIG23.4.GIF
48. http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/POWER.FIG2.GIF
49. http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/inscr/genocide/
50. http://www.wpunj.edu/~history/study/ws2/set10b.htm
51. http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/paper/fortescue.html
52. http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9266967
53. http://www.japantoday.com/jp/news/407850/all
See also
★ American terrorism
★ Extraordinary rendition
★ Unlawful combatant
★ Anti-americanism
★ Anti-imperialism
★ Manifest Destiny
★ Human rights in the United States
★ How the world sees america
This article provided by Wikipedia. To edit the contents of this article, click here for original source.
psst.. try this: add to faves
