• Unacceptable neglect of rural health care
  • Sadly familiar enforcement failure
  • Encounter with an advanced capitalist economy
  • Is US becoming a global diplomat instead of a global cop?
  • Smile of a slum kid
  • The spy who came in from Dhaka
  • End of discrimination in rationing system is necessary
  • Fusion brings total confusion
  • Paula shares her experience
  • Fresh foreign investment declines by 16pc
  • Beef, mutton prices go up abnormally
  • Pakistan to scan all NATO containers
  • No corruption ‘explosion’ on my watch: Indian PM
  • Five Tigers to play in SLPL
  • Ascent Corporate Soccer begins
  • Anamul to lead Jr Tigers in ICC U-19 World Cup
  • Dhaka city corpns announce budgets
  • Auto-rickshaw owners in Dhaka, Ctg to go on strike from July 11
  • Robbery, hijacking rampant on Dhaka-Ctg Highway
  • Dhaka likely to join TAPI project to tap C Asian gas
  • Shortage of ferries causes tailbacks at Paturia, Daulatdia
  • Grass-roots AL men fear polls ‘debacle’ if bridge not built
  • Flooding triggers river erosion
  • Shab-e-Barat observed
HOME  LETTERS
  
Print Friendly and PDF

Is US becoming a global diplomat instead of a global cop?



THE American ambassador to the Soviet Union before the Second World War, Jonathan E Davies, wrote in his book Mission to Moscow: ‘Blessed with two friendly neighbours, Canada in the north and Mexico in the south and two oceans, Atlantic in the east and Pacific in the west, America doesn’t have to worry about invasion. So America needs less soldiers and more diplomats to help other nations to resolve their conflicts peacefully. But if they decide to resolve their conflicts through military means, they will have to do so on their own. Call America when you are ready for peace.’
But history tells us that two oceans and friendly neighbours could not stop Japan from carrying out a surprise attack on Peal Harbour and since then America needed more soldiers than diplomats to keep peace. During the Cold war, America’s military presence stopped the Soviet Union from conquering Western Europe. America’s military might stopped North Korea from invading South Korea. But after two exhausting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States seems to be returning home, leaving the world to sort out their conflicts.
In Syria, the United States is trying to resolve the conflict by diplomatic means. While the Syrian regime is slaughtering its own people for demanding greater rights, the United States has shown little interest for military intervention. US secretary of state Hillary Clinton is working round the clock to convince Russia to persuade its Syrian ally to agree to a ceasefire, allowing the United Nations to organise an election. But she seems not realise that Bashar Assad has no interest in peace until the revolt is crushed. Without US military support, the Free Syrian Army cannot defeat Assad’s forces. So, the Syrian conflict will be protracted and extremely bloody. The only hope lies in a mass mutiny in the Syrian army, forcing Assad to give up power. The United States has become a spectator in the Syrian conflict as the slaughter of the civilians goes on. Diplomacy can do so much when tyrants rule.
Mahmood Elahi
Ottawa, Canada



Reader’s Comment

comments powered by Disqus
   
    Saturday, July 7, 2012

Online Poll


Do you agree with the government’s move to filter contents posted on social networking sites such as Facebook and twitter and on blogs?

  • Yes
  • No
  • No comment
Ajax Loader

Archives

Select MonthYear

May 2013

SunMonTueWedThuFri Sat
01020304
05060708091011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031