WHAT ARE THE TRUE FOREIGN POLICY GOALS OF NEOCONS & SUCCESSIVE U.S. ADMINISTRATIONS?

We are told that the selfless goals of those westerners wishing to transform the world are idealistic. They speak of wishing to spread democracy, freedom & human rights. But are these their true goals?

Clearly successive administrations of the USA believe in what they are doing. We hear their representatives talking constantly about democracy, freedom and human rights. But are these their true goals? As far as we know from the literature that is most identified with the neoconservatives (Neocons), the document titled ‘THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY’, we can say there is one extra goal to the three above that is required to bring the others about, that is to attain the preeminent dominance of the United States of America as the primary global administrator, judge, jury and executioner.

Ensuring democracy, freedom and the observance of human rights worldwide in perpetuity requires the level of supreme global dominance the Neocons and successive U.S. administrations (especially since 9/11) are seeking. It requires full spectrum dominance, complete and enduring global oversight. On the face of it the goals above may appear to be eminently positive ambitions. A world where democracy is everywhere, all populations live in freedom with human rights observed at all times. Criminal activity would be almost impossible as every human could be tracked precisely 24/7.

You will of course have immediately spotted a certain irony in the plan to bring about freedom for all. No one could fail to notice that currently we see a very definite attempt to close down freedom of speech for some of us at least. Add to this the deep flaws to be seen in the various forms of democracy we plainly see wherever it is offered as an example for others to follow. In the USA for instance you will have taken note of the lobby groups for the various gigantic industries of America, the so-called Defence Industry, Big Pharma and many others. Then there is the question of influence through sponsorship of U.S. politicians by these interests. How much of U.S. government policy then is determined by the people of the USA themselves via the electoral system? And how easy is it for the average American who wants to change things in the USA to mount a campaign and get elected? If he or she gets past the selection process without promising his or her backers will any money for the campaign be forthcoming and will he/she get access to air time or be reported to any extent in the media. So, we see the limits of “democracy”.  

Of course the road to the ideal situation as advocated so stridently by both Neocons and successive U.S. administrations is a rocky one to say the least, as we can see from the last two decades. No constantly reliable path to the stability required to have the level of peace necessary to make the positive changes to democracy, freedom and human rights has been found. Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Ukraine have shown that the plans drawn up to realise these Neocon/western political elite goals obviously lacked major elements. Perhaps all the chaos, death and destruction match some even more long term plan than those on display until now, but if so neither the Neocons or the political elites of the West are relating them to the world.Instead the four word mantra of democracy, freedom and human rights tends to be all we hear. If there is a long term plan it seems they don’t dare publicise it.

The negatives all come first they have no doubt told themselves. Perhaps several generations of negatives. Millions are displaced, societies are fractured, millions die in decade after decade of war. And of course many wars instigate new ones where rival powers collide as a result of a general atmosphere of instability caused ultimately by the constant activities of the Neocons and U.S. political elites attempting to deliver on their belief in ‘manifest destiny, to transform the world. And do we get any closer to those presumed goals of worldwide democracy, freedom and the observance of human rights. Surely this must be doubtful to say the least?

So, accepting that the goals stated above appear unattainable shouldn’t we ask ourselves then if these are the true goals of the Neocons/U.S. political elites? What other goals that have a more realistic possibility of attainment? What about maintaining U.S. national interests and those of their allies? What about ensuring that the USA and its allies never again suffer a 9/11-type event by broadening control and ability to know what the entire world population is doing at any given moment? (Full Spectrum Dominance.) Are these not more attainable goals by far? By weakening and subverting the sovereignty and governmental systems of target nations do these elite powers not shake things up in a manner where US-aligned interests might better take power and thus preserve and increase western national interests in such nations?

You will decide which goals are most likely to be attained and which are more likely to be the meat and bread issues that would get Neocon/U.S. elite adrenaline going. Are they truly saintly figures who visualise a perfect planet several lifetimes away where everyone if happy, free and living on a perfectly democratic planet? Or is something much more self-interested at work here?