"If
terrorism has led the U.S. toward aggressive extroversion, the economic crisis
is leading it to exercise introversion. If terrorism united that nation, the
2008 crisis divides and polarizes its society and political environment. If 2001
led toward unilateralism, 2008 opens new possibilities for dialogue,
cooperation and multilateralism."
A Tea Party activist: Polarizing at home and widely derided abroad, the author of this article, a former ambassador to the United States, considers the movement the economic equivalent of al-Qaeda.
The 20th century actually
ended well, with the end of the Cold War at the beginning of its last decade.
But up to then it had been a century of terror. It contained two world wars and
a balance of terror
over the more than four decades that the U.S. and USSR confronted one another,
armed to the teeth with thousands of nuclear arms.
In the early 21st century, we moved on from terror to terrorism. Not the classic
terrorism of yore, such as that by Palestinians against Israelis, the IRA in
Ireland or the Basque separatists in Spain.
With al-Qaeda, terrorism ceased
to be nationalist, territorial or secular. It became somewhat dispersed,
diffuse, intangible, and potentially omnipresent - motivated by a regressive utopianism
derived from the extreme interpretation of a religion that is otherwise worthy
of respect and admiration.
September 11 was the first
catastrophe endowed with instant universal impact, experienced in real time by
billions of people. A curious fact: this coup, even as it embodies a moment of
vulnerability for the United States, came to exacerbate feelings of superiority
and exceptionality rooted in the North American mentality - far more than the
triumph of the Cold War.
The Bush doctrine, summarized
as the war on terrorism, manifested itself in the form of militarized
patriotism based on the neo-conservative notion of the right to act
aggressively and unilaterally, and in defiance of international law or the U.N.
Then came ill-fated interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan. It was in this way
that at least temporarily, the international order was shaken violently. It was
sad, that first September of the century.
A few years later, the decade
closed with a new and in its own way, no less dark September: the financial
crisis of 2008. Again, it happened in an unexpected moment of U.S. vulnerability
(although not an unprecedented one, recalling the crash during the 1930s). But
this second September, nearly as instantaneous as the first, brought even more
serious and long-lasting consequences.
There was no bin Laden to
eliminate; there were no rifle shots to resolve it. If the impact of the events
of 2001 has damaged the global political order, what is happening now is a similar
reversal for the old economic order.
Posted
by WORLDMEETS.US
The established powers are
bending under the weight of their debt and loss of control, while emerging
powers are proving less vulnerable. But the crisis is global and its aftermath
will continue to manifest for a long time to come.
If terrorism has led the U.S.
toward aggressive extroversion, the economic crisis is leading it to exercise
introversion. If terrorism united that nation, the 2008 crisis divides and
polarizes its society and political environment. If 2001 led toward
unilateralism, 2008 opens new possibilities for dialogue, cooperation and
multilateralism.
There is the G20. Financial
organizations like the IMF and World Bank have been revitalized. The World
Trade Organization, despite the failure of the Doha Round, has been reinforced
as a source for regulatory frameworks and a forum capable of settling disputes
and controversies. Thank heavens.
But yes, there is still a
challenge to overcome in the U.S.: the Tea Party, an actor that, admitting to a
certain amount of exaggeration, stands for real economic terrorism. The al-Qaeda
of the economy
Roberto Abdenur served as ambassador to the United States
during President Lula da Silva's first term (2003 to 2006). He was also foreign
minister from 1993 to 1995
