Effects of the economic crisis on the world stability

The link between politics and economy is beyond doubt. There is a relation of causality between both. In the history of humanity this relation is clearly visible. In periods of economic crisis and extreme unemployment the trend to the violence increases and vice verse, in times of prosperity the trend to peace increases. For example, the two great confrontations of the 20th century, the First World War 1914-1918 and the Second World War 1938-1945 was preceded by a period of severe economic crisis and it may be assured that the two phenomenon’s were essentially a consequence of the economic situation.
The economic ruin fed the animosity feelings of the countries and created radical leaders as Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler that incited to the war.
Other local conflicts of the 20 century had the same origin: the poverty, the unemployment and the struggle for the resources.
The 21st century is not an exception and the rule of the history might repeat again.
For that reason the comprehension of the economic reality is something very important, because it let us anticipate what would happen in the world political scenario.
Two decisive facts dominate the global economic situation: the financial collapse and the natural resources crisis. Both phenomena are closely joined and will determine the political future of the humanity, especially the war and the peace between the nations.

This information of Reuters on February 12 2009 is a clear explanation of the situation:

“World economic crisis is top security threat: U.S. Intelligence
By Randall Mikkelsen– 1 hr 41 mins ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The global economic crisis has become the biggest near-term U.S. security concern, sowing instability in a quarter of the world's countries and threatening destructive trade wars, U.S. intelligence agencies reported on Thursday.
"The financial crisis and global recession are likely to produce a wave of economic crises in emerging market nations over the next year," said the report. A wave of "destructive protectionism" was possible as countries find they cannot export their way out of the slump.
"Time is our greatest threat. The longer it takes for the recovery to begin, the greater the likelihood of serious damage to U.S. strategic interests," the report said.
The report represents the findings of all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies and serves as a leading security reference for policymakers and Congress. Besides reviewing adversaries, it also considered this year the security impact of issues including climate change and the economy.
It said a quarter of countries have already experienced at least "low-level" instability, such as government changes, linked to the economy.
There have been anti-government protests in Europe and the former Soviet Union, and growing economic strains in Africa and Latin America, the national intelligence director, Adm. Dennis Blair, told Congress in delivering the report.
"Instability can loosen the fragile hold that many developing countries have on law and order, which can spill out in dangerous ways to the international community," Blair told the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Steps such as devaluations, tariffs and export subsidies were possible from countries desperate to boost economies.”
The report is enough illustrative and do not require more explanations.

Since its birth, capitalism created big crisis

The financial capitalism has dominated the world economy since the last decade of 19th century until the first decade of the 21st century, approximately 120 years. During that time, the financial capitalism accumulated a huge amount of money to build the modern world but it has generated, as well major crisis and losses for millions of people and thousands of businesses around the world who have lost their heritage as a result of its speculative practices. For example, “during the period following the First World War the U.S. banks showed a tendency to abandon the field of real banking business and becoming agents of financial speculation. Instead of extending loans, commercial banks used their short-term deposits to buy long period bonds recommended by the major banks and to buy or sell securities to the public willing to invest their money." (1)
(1) Harry Elmer Barnes. Historia de la Economía del Mundo Occidental.. Unión Editorial Hispanoamericana. México. 1973. Pages 622-623.

Through the so-called "controlled companies" financial capitalism appropriated full productive sectors from where all its actions were executed.
In the twenties led by the voracious American financial capitalism even lowered the wages of the workers to obtain more benefits that, among other errors, destroyed the purchasing power of workers and pushed the country towards the Great Depression.
"From 1920 to 1932 approximately 11,000 banks closed in United States before the "total closure" which occurred in early March 1933. Only 18,800 banks remained open. There is a contrast between the 11,000 banks which broke in the United States which the occurred in the same period in Canada, where only one bank was broken, the Home Bank, that closed their doors in 1932. While in United States by 1920 there were about 30,000 banks, Canada only had 10 banks with about 3,970 branches.”
As it can be seen in the quotations above, the financial capitalism led Capitalism system to its first big trial.(2)
(2) Idem,page 624.

How the American society overcame the Great Depression of 1929
Theoretically one could say that the 1929 crisis was caused in United States for two main reasons: a) the greed of bankers and b) the indifference, the “leisser faire” by the government, which created the conditions for the collapse of the economy. It was a misunderstood economic freedom that put the capitalist system near its end. Through a political action by the government of President Franklyn D. Roosevelt, the United States was able to overcome its most serious economic disruption.
These actions were not only economic but also a political concept known as “The New Deal” in which the state intervention was the main issue. The first thing President Roosevelt did to address the crisis was ---under strict control of the government--- to reopen the financial system—which had closed their doors in March 1933. Through a stringent law stopped the speculation in the stock market, established limits on the excesses of the electricity industry, which had been associated with the predatory practices of financial capitalism; enacted the National Industrial Recovery Act to encourage industry, reorganized the transportation, created the Federal Emergency Relief Administration to provide direct employment to the unemployed, created the Federal Surplus Relief Corporation in October 1933 to provide food, clothing and fuel to the unemployed, began a comprehensive public works program to provide direct employment to workers, revalued the dollar; and through the Home Owners Refinancing Act of June 1933, prevented the seizure of million people who could not pay their mortgages, among other important actions.
History repeats itself. And in the years 2008 and 2009, President Barack Obama took a set of measures similar to those adopted by President Franklyn Roosevelt in the thirties of the twentieth century.

Origin of the Global economic failure 2008

In the decade of the eighties in the 20th century appeared again in the horizon a new crisis that affected the most important industrial countries. In those years the mistakes of the global financial system began to be appreciated; in the precedent decade ---the seventies--- the financial international system gave loans of billions of dollars to the undeveloped countries at usury rates of interest.
The global crisis began when in the eighties the undeveloped countries could not pay their debts. In that moment the financial system employed their power and influence over the governments of the richest countries to impose a new method for recovering the loans and to avoid the bankruptcy.
The method was a new system of political economy that was named Globalization. Globalization is a system based in the principles of the Neo liberalism. The main objective of the new economic system was to impede the banks bankruptcy and to improve their benefits.
Bankers were aware that the debt was not recoverable but they created a formula for maintaining the debt as healthy assets. The formula was very simple: the refinancing of the debts at perpetuity, changing papers by other papers when these expire. Another formula employed by the financial system has been to issue billons of shares and bonds ---the most without real value--- to be negotiated in the Stocks Market of the world. The majority of these shares and bonds are a great risk because are surcharged or do not have any value, because do not have any support.
This has been the procedure used by the financial system and the cause of the main crisis of the 20th century, as the Great Depression of the thirties and the economic disaster of the first years of the 21st century.
In the eighties, the Globalization and the Neo liberalism was adopted as an official policy by the government of Margaret Thatcher in the United Kingdom and Ronald Reagan in the United States, and it was imposed to the rest of the world through the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
The mechanism was simple: the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund dictated a series of conditions to the undeveloped countries: a) adoption of the free market policies b) none intervention of the States in the economy of the countries c) privatization of the more profitable public companies to be sold to the international capitals.
These conditions were imposed to the undeveloped countries under a threat. The country that did not accept the conditions would not receive new loans of the international financial system and their debts would not be refinanced.
Of course, all the undeveloped countries accepted because they had no other option.

Political consequences of the Globalization

The results of the Globalization were not the best. The Globalization process was a failure. As a consequence of its imposition, the political panorama of many regions of the world changed.
In many countries the governments that adopted the Globalization model fell. In other countries leftist governments emerged. Latin America is perhaps the best example. Since the decade of the eighties, 10 Latin American countries have leftist governments.
The establishment of leftist governments in Latin America is a direct consequence of the Globalization and the Neo liberalism policies.
In the first decade of the 21st century the countries with left-wing governments are: Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Paraguay, Ecuador, Venezuela, Dominica Island, Cuba, Uruguay, Honduras and Nicaragua. In Honduras the situation changed in the year 2009 and a new government of right wing won the elections of November 2009.
The situation of Mexico must be considered in an especial manner, where a leftist candidate ---Andrés Manuel López Obrador--- lost the election in 2006 by very few votes and where there is a strong leftist movement with an important parliamentary force. This means that ---at medium term--- Mexico might fall in the hands of the left-wing. The same is happening in another country of Central America, El Salvador, where the Political arm of the former guerrilla, the “Frente Farabundo Martí”, in January 2009 won the parliamentary elections. In March 2009, the former guerrilla won the Presidency of that country, through Mauricio Funes. In Perú, other leftist, Ollanta Humala participated in the elections of the year 2006 and obtained an important voting.
It is necessary to highlight that Brazil and Mexico are between the major’s economies of the world. The Globalization and the Neo liberalism ---and especially the financial speculation that is the origin of the poverty of millions of persons worldwide--- also leaded these countries towards the left.

A way for promoting the democracy

The best road for promoting and strength the democracy is through the economic success. It is possible to create millions of new employments, to recover the economy and preserving the environment. Only it is necessary the political decision. For example, the creation of a Global Program of Reforestation ---ecological employments--- would be an effective form for combating the jobless and helping the conservation of the nature.
It is necessary to give the appropriate place to the real economy and to understand that the true wealth is not the money but the material production, especially the food, the water, the natural resources.
It is necessary a new ---holistic--- approach of political economy that highlight the supremacy of the real economy.

The Political Economy in the 21st century, Theory of the Political Supremacy

To get the human beings happiness must be the purpose of the economics.

Objective of the essay
The goal of this essay is to demonstrate the necessity of building a new approach of political economy that helps to create a best world.

Historic vision
The development of the economic thought practically began in the 16th century. Previously, some philosophers, Thucydides (455-4009), Xenophon (430-355), Plato (384-322) and Aristotle (384-322) made some contributions to the economics. In fact, the term economy comes from the Ancient Greek and was Aristotle who made a first approach to the Theory of Value. In his book Politics, he distinguished between the value of use and the value of change and realized also some considerations regarding the Quantity Theory of Money.
In the Roman Empire we find the contribution of the Emperor Diocletian; he established the first control of prices in the economy and appears too the work of Varron (116-27) on agricultural economics.
After, in the Middle Age (centuries V to XV), highlight the Summa Theological of Saint Thomas of Aquino (1225-1274), who exposed the value of the just price, the just salary and condemned the usury.
Some years after appear the work of Nicholas Oresme (1340-1382), who criticized the reduction of the value of the money made by kings. The work of Oresme was the inspiration of Thomas Gresham (1519-1579) who demonstrated ---some years after--- how the less valued currencies displace the most valued currencies.

The Mercantilism
Gresham inaugurated the Mercantilist thought in the 16th century. The Mercantilism defended the thesis of the state intervention in the economy. The mercantilists sustained that the wealth of nations was represented by their stocks of gold and silver and by a positive balance of payments; this means, by the promotion of the exports and the restrictions to the imports.
Among the principal mercantilists authors must be mentioned the names of Juan Botero (1540-1617) and his book Reason of State; Antoine Montchretien ( 1575-1621), who employed for first time the term political economy; Jean Baptiste Colbert (1619-1683); William Petty (1623-1687), with his book Political Arithmetic, considered, moreover, founder of the economics and Richard Cantillion (1680-1734) considered too founder of the economics.

The Physiocrats
Between the years 1760 and 1770 emerge in France a new economic vision. It was the thought of the Physiocrats, who’s sustained a different idea regarding the causes of the wealth of nations.
The Physiocrats thought that the agriculture was the base of the wealth and not the bullion (gold and silver), neither the advantages in the foreign commerce as had assured the Mercantilist theory until that moment. They believed in a natural order and were opposed to the state intervention in the economy. This represents the opposite thesis to the Mercantilism.
The principal exponent of the Physiocracy was Francoise Quesnay (1694-1774), who created the Tableu Economique in 1758, a model of economic analysis where he demonstrated the flows of the economy. This work was the base of the modern econometrics years after.

Classic Economy
In the year 1776 occur a fact that would change the economic history. It was the publication of the book An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, of the philosopher Adam Smith (1723-1790). This book is considered the main economic work of all the times.
Smith contradicted the appreciations of his predecessors and argued that the industrial production is the most important cause of the wealth of nations increase and made a severe opposition to the intervention of the state in the economy.
Smith inaugurated the period of the Classic Economy, which other principal figures were Thomas Robert Malthus (1766-1834); Jean Baptiste Say (1767-1832); David Ricardo (1772-1823); John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) and the main critic of the Classical Economy, Karl Marx (1818-1883).
This broad period of time, since the 16th century until the 18th century was characterized by a fact: the consideration of the economic phenomenon as a whole discipline: the political economy.
I think that the political economy was a method of analysis that took in account not only the economic conditions but the society as a whole. This method was used the same by the Mercantilists, Physiocrats and the Classic Economy.

The modern economics
In 1890 with the publication of his book Principles of Economics, Alfred Marshall founded the modern economics.
In the three previous centuries 16th, 17th and 18th, the economics was considered a subject of the Moral Sciences, a branch of the politics, and for that cause and methodological reasons it was called political economy. The founders of the economics were aware of the paper of the state in the economic behavior of the society.
Marshall developed the microeconomics. John Maynard Keynes called him “the founder of the diagrammatic economics…”
In 1903, thirteen years after the publication of his Principles, Marshall gets to create the Cambridge School of Economics and to separate the economics studies of the Moral Sciences and the politics. Since that moment the economics and the economists began a new road. They leaved the political economy and centered its efforts in concrete problems, in the microeconomics and in the new mathematical economics.
In the 46 years between 1890 ---with the publication of the Principles of Marshall--- and 1936 when appear the thesis of John Maynard Keynes, General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, the Marginalist and mathematic trend dominated the scenario.
In that historic period emerged important figures that would tackle specific economic affairs. Francis Edgeworth (1845-1926) with is Mathematical Physics and his Theory of Distribution; Wilfredo Pareto (1848-1923) and his Manuale di Economia Politica; John B. Clark (1847-1938) Distribution and Wealth; Eugene Böhm-Bawerk (1851-1914) Positive Theory of Capital; Frank Taussing (1859-1940) Tariff History of the United States; Werner Sombart (1864-1920) DES Moderne Kapitalismus; Gustav Casel (1866-1945) the Nature and Necessity of Interest; Arthur C. Pigou (1877-1959) Wealth and Welfare and Ludwig von Mises (1881-1973) the Theory of Money and Credit, among other economists.
In the already 46 years mentioned ---between 1890 and 1936--- the economic crisis acquired a new and intense dimension. The Communism obtained the power in Russia in 1917 and the radicalism found a fertile field in the impoverished European population. The inflation and the unemployment reached unbelievable figures in those years. This let the promotion of men as Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler and was the main cause of the First and Second World War. In the United States the Great Depression of 1929 threatened the real bases and the intellectual support of the North American capitalism.
The economic crisis discredited the economics and the economists: the old political economy and the new modern economics of Marshall and his pupils.

The paper of Keynes
John Maynard Keynes rescued the prestige of the economics. With his General Theory, he demonstrated that the control of the inflation and the unemployment were possible. He evidenced that the holistic method of the political economy was indispensable for resolving the economics problems. He tackled the crisis with an integral vision and proved that the control of the state and their investments are essentials for the economic progress.
The Keynes’s theory was a practice success and was applied in the United States, in Europe an in the rest of the world since the decade of the forty years.
“Keynes was the most important economic thinker of the 20th century. His influence was of such magnitude that the thirty years of the world economy success between the years 1945 and 1975 were called the Age of Keynes.
But as none remedy to the economics problems is permanent, the years of the Keynes success began to experiment problems and the crisis reappeared again. The increase of the oil prices since 1970 was one of the causes of the new global situation.
The monetary system established in Breton Woods in 1945 started to present problems at the end of the fifty years, when some European countries doubted of the dollar strength as instrument of international reserves, generating the prelude of a new world economic crisis.
In the seventy years appeared a new trend that hardly criticized the Keynesian model. It was the famous School of Chicago, which principal figure was the professor Milton Friedman, who revived the Quantitative Theory of Money. He asserted that the inflation is a monetary problem and that reducing the amount of money and adopting a policy of freedom to establish prices, wages and interests rates the inflation may be dominated…”
(1) Pablo Rafael González. Apreciación Crítica de la Política Monetaria, el bolívar oro. Monte Ávila Editores Latinoamericana, 2007. Pages 33 and 34.

Effects of the Neo liberalism
The intellectual position of the professor Friedman and the School of Chicago ---Neo liberalism--- was adopted by the government of Margaret Thatcher in England since 1979 and by the government of Ronald Regan in the United States. This policy was assumed by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank in those years and imposed to the rest of the world through the globalization.
The outcome of the globalization has been the enhance of the poverty and the environmental damage, the privatization of many of the public institutions of the undeveloped countries, the increase of the public services tariffs, the inflation and the augment of problems of balance of payments of the developed and underdeveloped countries.
For the industrial nations, one of the principal effects of the Neo liberalism and the globalization has been the financial crisis of the year 2008. The model affected and weakened the mechanisms of controls of the governments on the financial institutions.
The other great error of the model has been giving preeminence to the financial capitalism and to put the real economy in second place. These facts caused the explosion of the current crisis.

Conclusion
I think that the political economy is a method of analysis that take in account, holistically, the paper of the economics in the society. The political economy is not a doctrine but a system of thought for the global comprehension of the economics, politics, environmental and social relations.
The sin of the modern economy has been their partial approach, the micro vision of the economics. The modern economics has worked deep in the trees but has loosed the perspective of the forest.
The mistakes of the politicians and economists explain why does more of the three fourth parts of the world population remain in the poverty and the half live with less of $2 per day.
New challenges have arisen, among them the natural resources crisis as consequence of the overexploitation of the resources and the pollution. These phenomenons have created a new paradigm for the economy.
In the 21st century it is necessary to recover the method of analysis of the political economy and to build a new political conception for attacking the poverty, managing the problem of the natural resources and preserving the environment. With willpower it is possible to reach both objectives; God save the next generations.

Theory of the political supremacy, on the economics subordination

The state is the main economic actor. It does not matter the economic model: in the capitalism of free market, in the moderate socialism and, obviously, in the communist regimes.
This reflection is very important because it let to be aware of the true reality. The free market is an illusion. It does not exist. The states adopt the principal economic decisions still in the most advanced capitalist societies.
The free market is an appearance. Who determine the economic model? Who determine the fiscal, the financial and the monetary policy? Who decide the commercial policy, the regime of imports and exports? Who decide the policy of prices, the minimum wage and the policy of employment? Who decide the agricultural, industrial and environment policy?
You know the answer. And this confirms the economics subordination thesis. The politicians have in his hands the most important economical decisions in all the countries.
The politicians are the lawmakers and the laws define the organization and the functioning of the society.
The entrepreneurs and the workers are essentials for the economic development but its actions are conditioned by the state; their freedom is relative and limited. One entrepreneur needs the permissions and the licenses of the state for developing its business. Without those permissions and licenses none entrepreneur can realize its activities.
The business climate is determined by the big official’s policies. The state must exert their authority, however, sometimes adopt an attitude of indifference toward the other actors of the economic process; when this happen the consequence is the economical disaster. The recent financial crisis is a good example of that indifference.
But when the state exerts their role of supervision and control of the economic activities the situation is different and the society receives the correspondent benefits.
The great mistake of the last years has been the lack of control on vital sectors as the financial system. The balance between control and freedom is the key of the economic development.

The politics dominate the economy, elements of a different theory of the power, Theory of the Political Supremacy

Aerial view of the Capitol Hill [1]
The economics is not an autonomous discipline. It is subordinated to the politics. The most important economic decisions ---in all the countries--- are adopted by the politicians, this means, by the governments and not by the economists neither the economic sectors.
For example, the basic economic decision, that is the type of economic model that each society choose ---Free Market, Mixed Economy, Socialism or Communism--- is decided by the political factors of the countries. Obviously, they are influenced by the economic factors but these do not determine the definitive course of the economic policy.
The political factors ---governments and political parties-- represent the most powerful sectors of each society; they are the first power followed by the armed forces, the economic sectors, the mass media and the workers. Those are the real power of the society. They determine the composition of the formal powers.
After the political factors, the military power is the most important in all the societies: in the democratic advanced countries and in the rest of the political systems. It is hypocrisy to say other thing. In a first impression this seems not be true but in the reality that is the true. The following example illustrates very well this appreciation.
I remember to have read how ---in the days before the Pearl Harbor attack on December 7, 1941--- Washington warned to the Pacific Ocean Fleet about the imminence of the war. In the final days of November of that year the Secretary of State, Cordell Hull, said to the Secretary of War, Stimson that he had abandoned the negotiations with Japan and that since that moment the situation would be in the hands of the military forces. [2]
What means this? This means that Hull recognized that the time of the politics and the diplomacy had ended and the time of war was beginning.
In the democratic societies normally the armed forces do not participate in the politics. But an opinion of the armed forces in regard to any important affair is something that the structure of power can not disdain.
How the politics dominate the economy?
The laws of the economy are intellectual abstractions because in the reality the politics determines all the economic behavior in all the types of economic regimes.
The politicians, it means, the political parties and governments, are who decide the big economic policies; those are:
- The monetary policy (the value of the currency and the amount of liquidity in the economy)
- The financial policy (rates of interest)
- The fiscal policy (taxes, exemptions, including the bailouts to the banks)
- The commercial policy (regime of imports and exports)
- Wages Policy (minimum salary)
- Policy of prices (control or not)
- Agricultural policy
- Industrial policy
- Energetic policy
- Environment policy
The question is: what does really decide the private economy?
All the laws and rules that determine the economic behavior are decided by the governments. In consequence, the economy is a dependent discipline which laws and action in last instance depends of the politics factors.
Conclusion: these concepts might be the elements of a different theory of the power: the Theory of the Political Supremacy.
[1] Photo source: Commons.wikimedia.org/Wiki/file:aerial_view_o…
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States Federal Government under the terms ofTitle 17, Chapter 1, Section 105 of the US Code. See Copyright.

[2] Daniel Yergin. La Historia del Petróleo. Page 428. Javier Vergara Editor. Buenos Aires 1992.

Is the supremacy of the United States in peril?

To begin, I want to say that I believe that the United States is a great country, with an extraordinary population that has played a stellar role in the world. For example, if the United States had not participated in the Second World War today the freedom neither the democracy would exist.
The United States has contributed in an extraordinary form to the world development and for that reason is the first power of the planet, not only since the military point of view but since the political and economic.
However, in the last years, in the horizon have emerged signs that seems demonstrate that the country might be losing part of their influence and power. Is it this true? Until where? Is it false? This essay has as objective that you, the reader, obtain yourself a conclusion on the theme.
The work is divided in two parts; in the first it is presented an international vision of the situation and in the second part is presented an appreciation of some problems that impact the United States internal policy.
First part
After the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the Cold War end, worldwide the main institutions are in a process of deep change. The political, economics, moral and religious institutions are suffering an intense transformation. The United States has not escaped of this process. But the change in the United States is especially important because this country is the first power of the world, and everything that happen in the US affects the rest of the nations.
During the Cold War the powers maintained a permanent state of alert. The competition was not only limited to the military affairs but also to the economics, political, scientist and technologic issues.
However, since the Cold War end the attitude of alert diminished and the programs of national security of the powers began to change too.
This affected other areas as the political and economic as will be demonstrated in the followings paragraphs.
New threat to the peace
The communist threat was replaced by the Muslim terrorist threat that executed their first intense action on September 11 2000 in New York. Since then, the Western World has lived in constant uncertainty.
The reaction to the terrorist act of September 11 was the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. But those war acts brought serious consequences for the United States and the Middle East countries.
Iran intensified their nuclear program that ---obviously--- has the objective of producing nuclear weapons.
Al-Qaeda terrorist group enhanced their actions in the region and maintains the hostilities in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The clashes between Jewish and Arabs grew during the last years and the hope of peace is very far.
Is the US loosing the political and military battle in the Middle East?
So far, the United States has not been able of to retire their troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. On the contrary, recently it was announced that will send 20,000 new soldiers to the last country.
To reach the peace and a stable government in Iraq appear as a very difficult goal.
If the United States withdraws their forces from Iraq and Afghanistan ---without defeat first Al-Qaeda--- there is a real possibility that this group or other extremist groups take the control of these countries governments. If this happen, the consequences for the region and the world peace are unpredictable’s.
What to do then?
The hostility toward the US and the Western World in the Middle East countries has augmented in the last years and this represents a growing risk for the world peace.
Iran will develop their nuke
Without the Russia’s help Iran had not developed their atomic program. And Russia continues helping Iran in this matter. For that reason Iran will achieve their objectives. This demonstrates that the Russian discourse about the control of nuclear weapons is not true.
The sanctions of the United Nations and the United States and European threat are not enough for detaining the Iran nuclear program.
Which is the road?
North Korea blackmail to the US negotiators
North Korea violated the first Agreement of Nuclear Disarmament of 1994. In that opportunity obtained several advantages: financial help, food, petroleum and the promise of the construction of a nuclear plant for electricity.
A new Agreement was signed on February 2008 and again North Korea received petroleum and other advantages but, until now, December 2008, has not carried out the commitment of closing the nuclear facilities.
The political battle in other parts of the world
In the decade of the eighty years, the Prime Minister of England, Margaret Thatcher and the US President, Ronald Regan, adopted a new political economy.
The intensification of the free market policies and the globalization was the core of the new political approach, known as Neoliberalism.
Those ideas were imposed to the rest of the world through the financial institutions, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
The Neoliberal policy was not a success. On the contrary, one of their consequences was that nine countries of Latin America ---the majors--- are governed by leftist regimes.
Indeed, Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Paraguay, Uruguay, Ecuador, Venezuela and Nicaragua have leftist governments.
It is necessary to mention the Mexico’s case, where, recently, a leftist candidate, Cuathemoc Cárdenas, lost the election by too few votes. In Mexico, the left is a real option of power.
China is the new competitor
Which would be the attitude of the Chinese leadership might be reflected in the following statement of the general Zhu Chenghu, Dean of the China National University of Defense, who, on July 15 2005 in Beijing, declared to the international journalists the following:
“China must be prepared for attacking the United States with nuclear weapons, if this country support to Taiwan in their independence ambition.”
And he added:
“If the North American employ their missiles against the Chinese territory, China will respond with atomic weapons.”
“China is prepared for the destruction of all their cities at the east of Xian, in the center of the country but, the North Americans must to know that hundreds of their cities will be destroyed by the armed forces of China. The logic of the war imposes that the more weak power does their maximum effort for to defeat to their rival.”
Of course, a day after, the Chinese government assured that it was a personal statement of the general that do not reflect the official policy of the country.
However, it is valid to comment that information’s reveled by the international agencies has assured that in the past China helped to North Korea to develop their nuclear program and that, even, has sold uranium to this country. True? False?
Second part
The US might become a Latin country
This is a metaphor, but something that is not very far of the reality at long term.
In the history, ever the immigration has exerted a double influence: receive the culture of the receptor country and give their culture to the receptor country.
When a minority surpasses the 5 percent of the total population of a country already it is not a minority but an important part of the inhabitants of that country.
Since the political point of view, in a democratic system ---elections--- the five per cent of the population is decisive, especially because the difference between candidates is usually small. Since the economic point of view is also very important. The Latin population in the US is currently estimated in approximately 10% of the total.
In the reality, already it exist states of the United States with a very important presence of Latin Americans: Florida and California, for example. Even, in the first election of the President Bush, the international news agencies highlighted the decisive participation of the minority of Florida Cubans. True? False?
How to resolve the immigration problem is one of the great challenges of the US.
The nuclear security
In the last years, the international press has revealed a chain of facts that reveal how the nuclear security of the United States might be suffering a process of weakening.
The first incident happened in the year 2006, when four electrical fuses for ballistic missile warheads were mistakenly shipped to Taiwan.
The second was in the year 2007 when a B-52 bomber was mistakenly armed with six nuclear missiles when it flew between North Dakota and Louisiana bases.
The last incident occurred on May 23 2008 when a fire destroyed part of an underground nuclear launch site in Wyoming.
As it was indicated al the begin of this work, this kind of facts might reveal that since the Cold War end, the nuclear powers has diminished their attention on their nuclear security programs.
The moral crisis, how the gays gain influence
The developed societies face a severe moral crisis. The recognition of the marriages between persons of the same sex is the cherry of the cake.
The problem is that the gay community requests the right of to adopt children. If this is approved ---and please let me to use a metaphor--- in too few years the world will be a world gay, because the sons of these couples will not know what is the right and normal and what not.
The other problem is that this social group request to be accepted without restrictions in the armed forces of the countries, and there are politicians that support this ambition of the gay community. This would be the end of the armed forces.
The corruption has reached even institutions as the Christian and Anglican churches in several countries, with priests involved in sex scandals with children.
Conclusion
These are some facts of the current world reality. What will happen in the future? What do you think? pablorafael_gonzalez@yahoo.com