THE NEW WORLD ORDER

After the collapse and disintegration of Eastern Bloc and the establishment of the United States as the only remaining superpower, new developments in international relations have taken place, most obviously between the developed and developing nations. All the evidence suggests that the developed countries are making the most of the new order and, using the excuse of peace keeping and the protection of human rights, they are steadily imposing a new colonial order upon the third world countries.

In the past, governments of the developing countries possessed some degree of freedom in governing their countries. The principle on non-intervention in the internal affairs of other countries was an accepted international norm. Nowadays this principle has lost its importance and public opinion is more in favour of the preservation of human rights.

This has been achieved as a result of propaganda spread by the Western media.

They have managed to create a legitimacy for armed intervention in the internal affairs of the Third World Countries. Today the ability of America and her western allies to legitimise armed intervention in the affairs of small countries is such that in most cases they enjoy the support of public opinion.

Some good examples of this are the manipulation of public opinion by the media before the armed intervention in Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, ….

In order to prepare public opinion newsreels regularly produce images of horrendous plight of the innocent victims of war, famine, ineffectiveness or brutality of the regimes in these countries, in other words violation of human rights. At the same time they explained that the lawlessness and breakdown of public order made it impossible to send food and medicine to the suffering victims. Clearly the message was that under these conditions the establishment of law and order, which could only be imposed by foreign intervention, was a prerequisite for the delivery of food and medicine to the starving people of Somalia or displaced people in Afghanistan, Iraq or Libya.

Although this may have had a firm basis in truth, it raises the question of why Somalia for example was chosen among all the famine stricken countries of Africa, or why Establishment of democracy and preservation of human rights in Afghanistan, Iraq or Libya is a lot more important than other countries in the Middle East or Africa? Why pro-western and friendly regimes in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Uzbekistan and many others can get away with disregard of basic human rights in their countries and nobody ever raises a question.

As a result of civil war people also suffered in many African countries such as Ethiopia, Sudan, Mozambique and Angola, but none of them have the geopolitical importance of the Horn of Africa, and America and her allies have shown no interest in armed intervention to help the starving people of these countries.

It seems that on the one hand public opinion is prepared the acceptance of the principle of armed intervention, but on the other hand attempts are made to perpetuate hostility by creating a kind of balance of forces which can only be sustained by outside help.

In Somalia no attempt was made to disarm the warring factions and establish a democratic government. The only aim was to establish a foothold in this strategically important area. In Afghanistan no attempt was made to help the poor state of the economy of the country. No marshal plan for revival of the economy of this country was ever dreamt.

Now that Americans and their allies think that right goes with might and they have the god’s given the right to establish a new world order, it is important to remind them that the new world order would only be successfully established if it is based on justice for all.