Bush, Blair and BJP

What is common between the three Bs or Bush, Blair and BJP? The three, in fact, represent a dangerous negative thinking about the “other”. They need an enemy to hate and thrash to prove that they also exist. Moreover, they do not have any positive achievement that they could be proud of. The purpose of their life is to think negatively about the enemies whom they have created for themselves.

Bush wants an America that must dominate the world. Had he a positive thinking, he would have desired an America that will excell in all walks of life. But, blinded by his negative thinking, he has developed the fallacious philosophy of American supremacy which, he feels, is good for the world. Misguided by this false philosophy, he always thinks and also desires that the world must accept American supremacy. Anyone who opposes American perceptions or their worldview is surely an enemy who must be thrashed and defeated.

It is Bush’s erroneous philosophy that compels him to divide the world in two blocks of “us” and “them”. The world for him is either black or white and he wants that the entire world must share his narrow vision. You have to be either with him or against him as he has no regard for neutrality.

The biggest problem with Bush is that he thinks that the neutral is as great an enemy as the one who is vehemently opposed to him. Therefore he treats both the neutral and the enemy on equal footing and wants to eliminate them by using military force. Bush’s negative thinking further compels him to work for the elimination of all those who dare to compete with the US. For him the American supremacy is sacrosanct and no country has the right to challenge it. And if someone commits the folly of challenging or competing with the US, he must prepare himself for what has been done to Iraq and Afghanistan. In plain words the Bush doctrine demands the world to be inferior to the US, and if any one dares to go the other way, he must be ready to face the consequences. He would be first “persuaded”, then sanctioned against and finally beaten into submission. Saddam Hussein is the living example of what Bush would like to do to all of his enemies.

Blair does not deserve a better description than being an alter ego of Bush in Britain. The problem with the British elite whom Blair represents is that they have not reconciled with the loss of empire that they had over fifty years ago. A feeling to rule over the world still lingers somewhere in their mind. Obviously such a thinking is destined to fail miserably specially in the awakened world we are living in. Like the old-fashioned imperialism the so-called neo-imperialism will also disappear sooner than later. But Bush and Blair are not ready to accept this natural course of things. With the military firepower they have at their command, they feel that they can fashion a world of their own liking, a world that will submit to their imperialistic design. In their scheme of things no country outside their alliance should dare to raise its head, and if any one “commits the folly” of defying them, he would be thrashed and defeated.

What Bush and Blair are doing at international level, the BJP is trying to accomplish at national level in India. They, too, have a negative thinking and have created a “Muslim enemy” whose appeasement they can not tolerate. India is plagued with lots of problems from poverty to illiteracy but such issues never bother the BJP as its sole agenda is to establish and maintain the upper caste supremacy. Nursing any such idea or implementing any such scheme in the awakened India we are living in is surely impossible. There was a time when the upper caste dominated the Indian political scene. But see how things have changed in recent years. People acquainted with the philosophy of social change know for sure that the upper caste’s domination in such fields as media and economy will also disappear in the course of time. This, in fact, is the natural course of things. But the BJP would not accept it and would indulge in activities, including mindless violence against the Muslims, which are born out of their negative thinking.

What Bush, Blair and BJP must realize is that the world we are living in, specially the third world, does not believe in domination and the resultant violence. The overwhelming majority of youth specially has developed a positive thinking. The common belief is that the world has enough opportunities or more and more opportunities can be created which all sections of the society should capitalize upon for their genuine welfare. The majority also thinks that the ones left behind in the race of life should not be ignored but they deserve to be taken care of. In such an environment of opportunity and hope no negative thinking has a chance to prosper, flourish or succeed. But Bush, Blair and BJP do not seem to be learning their lessons. They, therefore, must get ready to be consigned to the dustbin of history.

[June, 2006]

Aggression Must Fail

The Israeli aggression against Lebanon and Palestine continues unabated with open American support. The world has not condemned the Israeli aggression as strongly as it used to do earlier. The Arab regimes are bickering as ever. Indeed many of them are happy that Hizbullah, whom they regard as an ally of Iran, is being destroyed. Husni Mubarak went a step ahead and declared that the Egyptian army is to defend Egypt and not Lebanon and thus he hit the final nail in the coffin of Arab nationalism.

Meanwhile Lebanon and Palestine continue to suffer daily Israeli bombardment which has killed or injured hundreds of people and destroyed property worth billions of dollars. The Israeli-American thinking is that violence can bring them peace or get for Israel secure borders. Ever since humanity began its journey violence, brutal and mindless, has never succeeded in achieving peace. The violence of the unjust strong and powerful has specially failed, and yet the Israeli-American leadership has no other strategy except aggression to advance their interests in the Middle East.

Violence and aggression have failed in rooting out insurgents in Iraq. They have also failed in Palestine and Lebanon in suppressing the freedom-fighters. But the Israeli-American leadership is not willing to learn any lesson. They still believe that hitting the opponents hard would terrorize them into silence or make them surrender. As a result they continue pursuing their policies of aggression in Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine.

It is obvious that the Israeli-American thinking is dangerously wrong. For over fifty years Israel has tried to suppress the Palestinians without success; and for over three years the U.S. is trying to bomb the Iraqi insurgents in to surrender but, as we see, the Americans too have failed miserably.

On the contrary the Israeli-American violence and aggression have strengthened the resolve of the freedom fighters from Iraq to Lebanon and Palestine. Of the three groups of freedom fighters, the Palestinians are the weakest as they have no worthwhile weapon with which to respond to the Israeli invasion and aggression. But even the Palestinian freedom fighters seem to be conveying the greatest message to Israel that you can break our hands and legs, you may completely paralyse our body, and yet we would refuse to surrender. This refusal is important. This would never give the Israelis the joy of being victorious, and would also not give them the peace of mind without which they can never think of being a safe and secure country.

There is another important point that deserves to be noted. Hizbullah was not as strong a few years back as it is today. Their missiles are no match to those of Israel and America, neither in technological sophistication nor in their capacity to cause destruction. And yet now they can hit targets over hundred miles away. Earlier the Hizbullah missiles could not hit their targets beyond a few miles. But now the militia is talking about hitting Tel Aviv and even beyond. There are several reasons behind Hizbullah’s growing military power. But the point to be noted here is that it is not Israel’s or America’s monopoly to be powerful; others too have mind which they can use to grow in strength. Hizbullah is the case in point.

The problem with Israel is that it always thinks in terms of power and strength which can enable it to unleash aggression against its opponents. It came into being by using violence and terror, and has always believed that only through this method it can survive as a nation. Yes, it has survived, but has never lived in peace. In fact, it can never live in peace, specially as long as it continues to believe in the “philosophy” of violence and terror. For, small-scale reprisal from Hamas or stray missiles of Hizbuallh hitting deep into Israel have the potential to disturb the peace which the Israelis need so desperately to lead a normal life.

It is time for both Israel and America to see the writing on the wall. Their long history of aggression in which they often succeeded militarily, and also sometimes reaped economic benefits, is no guarantee that they would always remain powerful. Hizbullah’s challenge to Israel is not like that of an equally powerful nation. But the way they have progressed militarily and the damage they have caused to Israel in the ongoing conflict should make Tel Aviv and Washington wiser than before. With its present military might Hizbullah can not defeat Israel but surely it can make their life miserable. Therefore both Israel and America must think that violence and aggression can give you temporary victory but not a peaceful country or secure borders within which you can sleep without fear of being attacked.

Yes, aggression can give a people temporary victory, but it should not be allowed to triumph for ever. In fact, it should be punished and repulsed so that humanity’s faith in peaceful international relations may survive, if not flourish. We also must realize that aggression is a violent expression of the rage within which ultimately devours the aggressor. And what succeeds ultimately is not aggression but resilience which Hamas and Hizbullah seem to possess in abundance.

[July, 2006]