|
Archived Articles
Simeon Mitropolitski is a Canadian analyst, of Bulgarian origin, and a former syndicated columnist with the Bulgarian News Agency (BTA). He is the author of several hundred articles dealing with hot political and economic topics, both national and international.
He was part of the first group of Bulgarian intellectuals and students that began the opposition movement that finally put an end to the communist regime in this country in 1989, and in 1996-1997 participated in international observation teams during the elections in several Balkan countries - Romania, Albania and Bulgaria.
In 2002 Simeon and his family moved from Bulgaria to Canada where they live now in Montreal, province of Quebec. Simeon is a Master of Political Science from McGill University and a B.A. of Political Science and History.
Global Real Estate Project
|
 |
Bush Doctrine? Old American Doctrine!
"So it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world." U.S. President BushIn the U.S. foreign policy there were many doctrines named after sitting presidents. When the current president G.W. Bush announced last week that his policy would be to seek and support democratic movements around the world that was looked upon as no less than a radical shift in the U.S. foreign policy. Looking at so many comments that share this premise, it's necessary to open the history textbooks in order to make some important corrections. Seeking and supporting liberty and having the ultimate goal of ending the tyranny in the world are some of the basic premises of the American Revolution. From the beginning it wasn't only about making America safe for liberty. It was considered as political lab that could have repercussions for the world as s whole. The experiment in the U.S. was more than successful; the experiment in the world is so far inconclusive. What indisputably we have is freedom existing in many large countries, which contradicts the 18th century political philosophy assumptions. 19th century, which usually was depicted as an "age of isolationism", in fact didn't isolate the American public opinion from what was going on in the world. The American response to the national liberation movements in Latin America was the famous "Monroe doctrine". Now the left looks at it as symbol of the U.S. neo-imperialism, but at the time it was hailed by all revolutionaries in the world. Look at the American newspapers from the mid-19th century onward and you won't find any article hailing tyrants and condemning the national movements. The American public had made its mind and it was to support morally the freedom around the world. Jumping ahead we reach the famous WWI statement by the president W. Wilson that the U.S. must enter the war and join the forces of all freedom-loving nations to make the world "safe for democracy". Why? He argues that democracy makes the wars unlikely. More democracies among the nations mean less wars, deaths and destruction. That was 1917. Another leap ahead in time. Another president-democrat F.D. Roosevelt makes explicit link between the popular governments and peace. His child, the United Nations, must prevent new wars by making nations join together forces. His successor Truman makes in 1947 his famous doctrine that explicitly links the freedom in remote countries like Greece and Turkey with the freedom at home. 15 years later another president democrat J.F. Kennedy makes inevitable the peaceful decolonization by strongly supporting liberation movements and condemning colonial oppressors. Do we have to go even further and see the president-republican Reagan naming the USSR "Empire of evil" and calling for liberation of its millions slaves despite its thousands of nuclear weapons? How can we name this policy apart from supporting freedom? In short, what some have already called "Bush doctrine" is in reality the "American doctrine". It's about making possible for every man and woman on this planet to enjoy the fruits of their hard labor, to obey the laws they have taken part to promote, to live in dignity and respect within their communities. The means to achieve this goal may slightly differ from military intervention to stop wars and genocide to diplomatic pressures but the goal remains the same. There should be no doubts the Americans will live much happier in a world of free people. That isn't just a dream of one man sitting in the Oval Office no matter how influential he is. This dream lives for more than 2 centuries and that's the guarantee that it will live long after the current administration is part of the future history textbooks.
|
