This is the second part of my article “Tale of Two Standards in World Politics – Part II.” The first part “Tale of Two Standards in World Politics – Part I” [1] appeared in the “Political\/Social Commentary” page of this March 2022 issue of this website. These two articles assess the U.S. government in the four important metrics of democracy, human rights, peace, and addressing world problems. In particular, these two articles assess the actual performance of the U.S. government, and not what the U.S. government is advertised to be. Part I discussed the two metrics of “democracy” and “human rights.” This Part II discussed the other two metrics of “Peace” and “Addressing World Problems,” and It also provides more discussion on the American dream and a summary of the whole two-part article.<\/p>\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n
Since the end of WWII, the U.S. has been involved in several major wars that are usually well known to the world, such as the Korean War (1950-1953), the Vietnam War (1955-1975), the Gulf War (1990-1991), the Iraq War (2003-2011), and the War in Afghanistan (2001-2021). Not so well known to the world or to the American public is that the U.S. has also been involved in many other wars [2], such as:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In addition to these wars, the U.S. has also been involved in numerous regime changes when the people in power in these foreign countries were not in alignment with the positions of the U.S. There has been a large number of regime change activities. [3][4] To mention all these regime change activities will take a much longer article. Below we list only a subset of such regime change activities, especially during the cold war period before the dissolution of USSR to Russia in 1991: <\/p>\n\n\n\n
As you can see, the U.S. government has engaged in a large number of wars, declared and undeclared wars. Furthermore, the U.S. government has also engaged in a large number of regime change activities in foreign countries. These regime change activities interfere in the internal affairs of sovereign countries and are not consistent with the self-projected gold standard of the U.S. government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The purpose of our discussion is not to conclude that the U.S. has engaged in the most number of wars or engaged in the most number of regime change activities in foreign countries. See, e.g., References [5] and [6] for regime change activities by USSR or Russia. The purpose of our discussion is that the actual behavior of the U.S. government does not match at all to the gold standard presented by the U.S. government that it is always working for peace and it is always acting for the best benefits of the people of any country.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We all know that our world has many critical problems. These critical problems are all important, and some if not addressed properly could result in the end of civilization as we know it. Here are among the major problems:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Global Warming:<\/span><\/strong> As the most industrialized country and the richest country in the world, the U.S., together with China the country with the most people and the second largest economy, contribute the most to fossil fuel pollution. We must take the lead to reduce our use of fossil fuel and create alternative energy sources. It is good that we are moving toward electric vehicles, and we are relying more on other alternative energy sources, such as solar power and wind power. But we may not be moving fast enough.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In 2016 the world reached an agreement to address the climate change issue. It is known as the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. However, the U.S. under President Trump withdrew on June 1, 2017 from this agreement. After he was defeated in the 2020 U.S. presidential election and replaced by President Biden, the U.S. rejoined the Paris Agreement in February 2021. [7] On an issue of this importance to the U.S. and the whole world, it is really unimaginable and unconscionable that the U.S. would adopt such a position and waste several years of crucial time. It makes the world wonder whether the U.S. can always be counted that it will assume its role, as well as involving in the leadership as the world’s most powerful and richest country.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We should also use our technology prowess to develop new methods to solve climate change related problems. For example, one of the consequences of climate change is that the sea level will rise, and therefore some of the coast land will increase in salinity and therefore may not be able to grow food. However, technology may also be coming to the rescue, because China has shown in recent years that by selecting a type of wild rice that is more resistant to saline and alkali, such land with higher level of salinity can be used to grow rice. [8] As we discuss later in the discussion on “hunger,” China in the last few years has also successfully used new technological technique to transform deserts into fertile land. [9] <\/p>\n\n\n\n Climate change can create devastating droughts. We should also investigate how scientific breakthroughs can create artificial rain as well as other methods to reduce the negative impacts of climate change. Instead of dropping out of the Paris Agreement, the U.S. with its well known research infrastructure and large number of brilliant scientists and engineers should be able to contribute greatly in this effort if our government decides that it is one of our important goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nuclear Disarmament:<\/span> <\/strong> <\/p>\n\n\n\n People recognize that there is no winner in a nuclear war. As a matter of fact, our civilization may not survive as we know it after a nuclear war. Many countries have dozens or hundreds of nuclear weapons, with the U.S. and Russia having thousands of nuclear weapons. However, detonation of just a few nuclear weapons may already be sufficient to result in calamitous damages to the world. That is why unless the world can agree to getting rid of all nuclear weapons, the next best thing is to commit to a “No First Use” (NFU) policy, i.e., a pledge by a nuclear power not to use nuclear weapons as a means of warfare unless first attacked by an adversary using nuclear weapons. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Currently, the only country with nuclear weapons who has a NFU policy is China. [10] The U.S. with its massive and sophisticated conventional weapons should be willing not to rely on its nuclear weapons as a deterrent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Hunger:<\/span><\/strong> <\/p>\n\n\n\n Current estimate is that about 10% of the world’s people do not have enough food to eat on a regular basis. [11] We need to produce more food for the world, as well as more equitably distribute the food. As we already previously mentioned that new technological advances have recently shown that desert lands can be converted to become fertile fields to grow food, and food can be grown in land immersed with water of high salinity. Again, should the U.S. with its sophisticated research infrastructure and talented pool of scientists and engineers willing to contribute to this effort? Besides addressing technical questions, to address the world hunger problem would also require overcoming many political and social obstacles. Therefore the most important question may not necessarily be the scientific question, but the political question of the commitment of the U.S. government. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Health:<\/span> <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Many countries in our world have a lot of people with poor health, high infant mortality and low life span. To address the health issue of the world, we may be able to learn some lessons from addressing the Covid-19 epidemic. Not only that we need proven medical solutions and skills, we also need political and social commitment, and willingness to sacrifice some individual freedom for the benefit of the larger community. Of course, solving the question of global health is also related to the previously discussed problem of hunger (and associated malnutrition). Again, the most important question may be the political question whether we are willing to make the commitment to work together with the world to address this critical problem. <\/p>\n\n\n\n J<\/span>obs:<\/span><\/strong> <\/p>\n\n\n\n On a small scale, people need to have jobs to earn enough money to provide for themselves and their family. On the large scale, a country needs to have a vibrant economy to provide enough jobs for its citizens as well as providing an infrastructure for the country’s transportation, communication, education, healthcare, security, etc. Usually by working together collaboratively with other countries, we can complement each other and also increase the outputs of an individual country. Something like a joint or multi country collaboration, similar to a belt and road initiative, can create additional benefits. Instead of fighting among ourselves and criticizing each other and trying to sabotage each other’s contributions, countries should seriously consider how we can work together and complement each other and create teams whose outputs are greater than the sum of individual parts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Again, the question is whether the behavior of the U.S. government actually matches what it pretends to be. We should look inward and ask whether we are really doing our share, and working together with the rest of the world to right perhaps a mis-directed or wandering ship.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One may raise the following question: The fact that there seems to be an American Dream in the minds of many Americans as well as other people of the world, isn’t that already an existence proof that the American system of government must have been doing things close to what has been advertised. This is a very important question, which we actually have previously discussed in another article in this website. [12] We only have time to summarize the main points of that article: <\/p>\n\n\n\n This is not to deny that other factors, e.g., its democratic system of government (in spite of many shortcomings pointed out earlier in this article), the American entrepreneur spirit, the creativity and independent thinking of Americans, and the hard work of Americans, also contributed to the success of the U.S. during the first two hundred-plus years of its existence. The point we want to make is that there was almost an ideal geographical or natural environment for the U.S during most of its existence that helped to create the base for the American Dream, and thus propelling the U.S. into the richest and most powerful country in the world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The important question now is whether the American Dream can be continued in the future? In my opinion, unless drastic changes occur, it will not happen. These drastic changes would need to include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Unless these changes occur, the American Dream will not be able to continue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The U.S. government always presents itself as a government that is democratic, respects human rights, treats other countries with peaceful intention, and helps to solve world problems. That is the image that the U.S. government and the U.S. mass media depict itself. In reality, the U.S. government doesn’t act that way. It is not a democratic government of working for the benefits of all its people, it treats its citizens differently depending on race, sex, place of origin, wealth, social and political status, etc., it involves in many wars, and instigates numerous regime changes. Not only that it often doesn’t get involved in solving various world problems. It sometimes drops out of critical agreements (e.g., Paris Agreement on Climate Change) and criticizes or even sabotages other countries’ contributions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We are not saying that the U.S. government is worse than other governments, but it is definitely not the model government that it presents itself as and wants other governments to copy and mimic. We need to have an open mind and allow other governments to try other systems of government and join together cooperatively to address the world’s problems. It is not just everyone for himself, but we are in this together. <\/p>\n\n\n\n [1] “Tale of Two Standards in World Politics – Part I”: https:\/\/www.dontow.com\/2022\/03\/tale-of-two-standards-in-world-politics-part-i\/<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [2] See, e.g., List of Wars Involving the U.S.: https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States#21st-century_wars<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [3] See, e.g., United States involvement in regime change: https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [4] Also, see, e.g., “The U.S. tried to change other countries\u2019 governments 72 times during the Cold War,” Lindsey L. O’Rourke, The Washington Pos<\/em>t, December 23, 2016: https:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/news\/monkey-cage\/wp\/2016\/12\/23\/the-cia-says-russia-hacked-the-u-s-election-here-are-6-things-to-learn-from-cold-war-attempts-to-change-regimes\/<\/a>. According to the author, of the 72 times, 60 were covert operations and 6 were overt operations. And among the 60 covert operations, only 20 successfully brought the U.S.-backed government to power, and 40 failed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [5] See, e.g., Soviet involvement in regime change: https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Soviet_involvement_in_regime_change<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [6] See, e.g., Russia involvement in regime change: https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Russian_involvement_in_regime_change<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [7] “United States Officially Rejoins the Paris Agreement on Climate Change”, February 21, 2021: https:\/\/www.npr.org\/2021\/02\/19\/969387323\/u-s-officially-rejoins-paris-agreement-on-climate-change<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [8] See, e.g., Bloomberg News<\/em>, 2\/19\/2022: http:\/\/www.dontow.com\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/By-Bloomberg-News-growing-rice-in-seawater.docx<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [9] Numerous articles on this subject can be found in the web. Here are a few examples: (1) \u201cRegreening the Desert with John D. Liu\u201d \u2013 5\/7\/2017: https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=IDgDWbQtlKI<\/a> (47:30); (2) \u201cHow China transformed its desert into a fruit growing oasis\u201d \u2013 9\/26\/2018: https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=BepMqZ4pFXQ<\/a> (29:07).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [10] See, e.g., https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/No_first_use<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [11] See, e.g., https:\/\/www.actionagainsthunger.org\/world-hunger-facts-statistics<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\nRevisiting the American Dream:<\/span><\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
Summary:<\/strong><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n