Mearsheimer: American Imperial Ambitions; British Elections; Georgia On Our Mind

I’ve done a summary of a conversation today between Judge Nap and Professor Mearsheimer. Direct quotes will be—you guessed it!—within quotation marks. This portion begins a bit after the 30 minute mark of a 38 minute video.

American v. Israeli Imperial Ambitions

At about 30:30 Judge Nap presents the question of whether Israel is imperialistic in the same way as the US is imperialistic--the way US bases pop up all around the world.

The Prof doesn't want to call America an empire. Instead he describes the US as "a Great Power that has imperial ambitions." NATO expansion, he says, is evidence in support of the second part of the statement--that America has "imperial ambitions." But then he goes on to state that the US is "in a class by itself in terms of expansion--we basically believe we should be running the planet. We have the right and the responsibility to intervene in the domestic politicss of every country in the world."

Turning back to Israel, as framed in Judge Nap's question, The Prof states that Israel is not in the same class as the US in terms of imperial ambitions. Israel's ambition, he says, is to establish a true Jewish Greater Israel rather than an empire as such. The borders of Greater Israel in that sense are somewhat flexible in conception, and have varied at different times. The borders could certainly include portions of neighboring countries. The minimum boundaries, at this point in time, would include the West Bank and Gaza.

My comeback to The Prof, if I had been in on the conversation, would have been: Why should Israel seek to be an empire if it largely directs US imperial ambitions through the Neocons and The Israel Lobby in America? While America may not fulfill all of the ambitions for Israel that Israel harbors for itself, the influence over US policy that Israel possesses allows Israel to throw its US supplied weight around to a degree that dumbfounds most of the rest of the world. That's a reality that few Americans even now appear to understand. Call it Empire By Another Name, or no name at all.

The Judge then brings up Ben Franklin's supposed response to a questioner outside the hall of the Constitutional Convention. To the question, 'What have you given us?' Franklin is supposed to have responded: 'A republic, if you can keep it.' The Judge then states that it is his belief that we haven't kept the republic. Instead we've become an empire. He asks The Prof point blank whether he agrees with that assessment.

The Prof replies that, certainly since the end of WW2, the US has always had a very ambitious foreign policy. That ambition has only increased since the end of the Cold War. At the same time, he says, we have had a liberal democracy inside our borders. There is an inherent tension betweeen those two aspects of the American reality. The more ambitious your foreign policy the more damage you do to the liberal democracy at home. "Enormous damage has been done to our liberal democracy since the Cold War ended. What is going on today with regard to Israel is doing even more damage. Because if you look at what's happening inside the US with regard to freedom of speech because of our support for Israel--anybody who is really concerned about the future of our liberal democracy can't help but be sick to his or her stomach about what's happening. So a serious argument can be made that our imperial ambition does damage at home that is not good for liberal democracy.”

The British Election

The Judge pivots to Sunak's call for a snap parliamentary election on July 4th. The two agree that the polls show the Conservatives "getting their clocks cleaned." While allowing that a lot can happen in six weeks, The Prof hurries to add that he doesn't believe that a Labor government will make any difference at all in foreign policy. The Prof points out that Corbyn was dumped after being smeared as an anti-Semite, and Keir Starmer will not want to repeat that. "What happened was The Lobby in Britain, which is very powerful, understood that Jeremy Corbyn *would* have changed British foreign policy towards Israel had he been elected. They wanted to make sure that didn't happen. Corbyn was pushed overboard and, again, The Lobby played the principal role in throwing Corbyn overboard. You can be sure that Starmer understands that, if he doesn't dance to The Lobby's tune, he'll get thrown overboard as well."

This morning I came across a twitter link to a really excellent video about the situation in Georgia. It’s a terrific example of how the US advances the imperial ambitions that Prof. Mearsheimer describes.

Max Blumenthal @MaxBlumenthal

Who's behind the color revolution in Georgia?

via @ActiveMeasures8

Who's Behind the Color Revolution in Georgia?

As protesters besieged the Georgian parliament, a delegation from the body junketed to DC to meet with the CIA cutout NED [National Endowment for Democracy], which has spent years pumping up opposition activists with loads of cash.

12:20 AM · May 22, 2024

The video itself is just 7 minutes long. Featured in it are smarmy US officials, all talking from the same page that was given to the French president of Georgia to read: The law passed by the Georgian parliament that would require NGOs receiving over 20% funding from foreign sources to reveal those sources, is a “Russian style law”. The US won’t allow Georgia into the EU—does that phrasing surprise you?—if that law goes into effect. Basically, “democracy” is just another word for following the Rules Based Order. The US defines “democracy” to suit its interests at any given time.

You’ll definitely want to peruse the Wikipedia page for the CIA cutout National Endowment for Democracy (NED):

Upon its founding, the NED assumed some former activities of the CIA. Political groups, activists, and some governments have said the NED has been an instrument of United States foreign policy helping to foster regime change.

Lastly, I don’t know anything about Kane Brown, but he does a pretty good version—IMO, YMMV: