Coup in Turkey

Last week, a news circulated the global village that a military coup failed in Turkey. So far, there is news from Turkish president that some military officers were trying to topple his regime. However, as more news are circulating around the world, it appears that maybe he staged the coup to eradicated those individuals who are standing in his way. Because he has begun to detain judges, and crown attorneys. Plus, the military officers were low ranking officers.

President of Turkey is accusing a cleric in the US for masterminding the coup in Turkey. It does not make sense why a military person wants to follow order from a civilian and nature of coup is full of secrecy.

A New Boogie Man Is in the Town

Food for Thought

It is Time to Rethink

Canada's Arm Race

Muslims in Canada

End Times

Canada's Role in International Relation

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-must-do-more-to-help-nato-combat-russian-threat-mulroney-says/article30531861/

 

On June 21st, 2016 The Globe and Mail published an article "Mulroney offers advice on jets, NATO Commitments". However, The Globe and Mail paper published the above article on June 20th, 2016 with a different title which says "Canada must do more to help NATO combat Russia threat, Mulroney says". The point is not what the title says, the point is what paper is sought to convey a message to readers. Coming to this point, does the article resonate post 9/11 how politicians used fear of terrorism to encourage us to go in war against Afghanistan, Iraq and other nations because they posed threat to the national security of western nations? Does Russia pose threat to sovereignty of Canada? Indeed, it does. All nations around the world are dealing with security dilemma, and it is not unique to Canada.

Canadians should not get panic that Russians are invading Canada. They should ask themselves why should we listen to Mr. Mulroney? Is it because of F - 35 deal that he is trying to convince the PM Trudeau to buy them and not making the same mistake Canada did during helicopter purchase in 1990s that he was trying to buy and Mr. Chretien nullified the contract and cost more to taxpayers to buy them in the long run?

 

The point of this paper is, not turning Russia into a boogeyman, and allowing fear shapes public policies.  But, to think what is good for Canada. Perhaps, F - 22 airplanes should be bought to defend national sovereignty of Canada. Last, we should make Russia economic partner of Canada so this economic partnership would deter Russia from invading Canada and moving toward political liberalism and not political realism. 

Who Machiavelli Is

What Is Western Alienation

Politics of Race in Canada

Expanding Canada's Economic Frontier

Zoroastrianism, Christianity, Karl Marx, Machiavelli

Persian Gulf War and Just War Theory

The US Foreign Policy Poses Threat to the Global Security

Libertarian

What is God

Terrorism in US

Mr. Omar Mateen who came to the US from Afghanistan with what kind of ideas? It is so sad that this young man used violence as a means to justify the end. Does violence justify anything? Did Hitler win over heart and mind of people by using violence? No, he did not. Of course, Mr. Mateen too failed to win people's heart and mind.

Violence is not an answer to the problems. Diplomatic discussion with others would allows people with a room to resolve their differences and not to this form of action. 

It is time to speak loudly and clearly that use of violence is unacceptable, and those who uses violence against others. They must be brought before judicial system to face law. Last, if you do not like west, please leave.

Turkey and Saudi Arabiab After Dust Settles Down

The US is no longer is capable of toppling the head of state of Syria, and Turkey and Saudi Arabia played crucial role to topple Mr. Bashar Al - Assad as head of state of Syria. It is very obvious that he was able to maintain power because Russia provided military aid to Mr. Al - Assad to confront the insurgent groups. In addition, the Islamic Republic of Iran provided military aid to the regime in order to keep the regime intact in place. If the regime in Iran would not provide military aid to Mr. Al - Assad, it was a good possibility for the US to do regime change in Iran too. Now, the US no longer can ensue the policy of the regime change in the Middle East. 

The trouble comes here that Turkey as member of NATO aided insurgent groups in Syria and Iraq. Moreover, Saudi Arabia too aided the insurgent groups to topple the head of state in Syria and Iraq. The above nations were instrumental for regime change policy in the Middle East. However, they failed to topple the Islamic Republic of Iran. In fact, the regime in Iran has gained more power in the region, and galvanized solidarity among Shia Muslims in the region. Now, the US really has no power in the region. The Saudi Arabia remains vulnerable in the region since Iran excommunicated with Saudi over pilgrim issue. The regime in Saudi would face serious economic consequences for its role in the region for aiding the US for doing regime change in the Middle East. Furthermore, Turkey too would face serious economic consequences from the Middle East nations. 

There is also matter of Israel that what it will happen to it. Israel would face serious military consequences by its adversaries, and the US will play major role in the region, but not in a sense of regime change. 

All in all, the situation in the Middle East has become complicated, and no longer realpolitik is the common currency, but really diplomacy will become a common currency in the Middle East.  

What to Do With US War Machine?

On December 25^th, 1992 former Soviet Union collapsed, and no longer the Red Army posed a military threat to the US’s capitalist economic system. The collapsed of communism in Russia was a beginning of a new era or a new world order for the nations around the world. Prior of the collapse of Soviet Union, there were nations around the world that they aligned their foreign policy with former Soviet Union’s foreign policy in form of military and economic system which stood in stark contrast with the US’s foreign policy of military and economic system. Most importantly, the collapsed of Soviet Union led to a domino effect as several republics began to gain their own self – autonomous.

The collapsed of Soviet Union provided a unique power vacuum for the US to advance its interest globally. There was reunification of European nations. The West and East wall collapsed, and the capitalist system began to permeate in the region. These nations had financial institutions that they were compatible with communist form of economy, and the new system of capitalism was going to give the old economy a shock way. As a result, countries like Poland could not keep – up with the capitalist system, and remain in stage of vulnerability of self – sustaining itself. There were some countries like East – Germany that it joined West Germany. In fact, the West Germany was the engine of capitalist economy in Europe and reunification with East Germany did not hurt the economy.

The issue of self – autonomy became an international issue during 1990s. Yugoslavia disintegrated among different ethnic groups due to past grievances. The US used its military might to suppress violence in the region. The US used its military power in the region not because it wanted to have peace, but because these new regimes needed to know that the new boss is the US and not Russia. According to Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes after the Cold War by Steven Levitsky and Lucan Way, who are pro US foreign policy around the world. In fact, they resonate the dependency theory that as long as nations around the world follow the US laws, they will remain at peace. Otherwise, those nations will be entangled in civil – wars. Such examples are not figment of imagination. When Muhammad Ghazafi was head of state of Libya, he was on side of Soviet Union. After collapsed of the Soviet Union, the US foreign policy was to toppled Mr. Gazafi’s regime at any cost. The US did and not Libya is burning alive at hand of civil – war. Innocent peoples are fleeing Libya to European nations by using unsafe vessels. Not all migrants are lucky. The vessels are sinking in the middle of ocean, and these are mostly women and children that they are drowned in the middle of ocean. Furthermore, the US has a foreign policy in place to topple Hosni Mubarak in Egypt as it did, and not this nation is in state of chaos. The US has a foreign policy of toppling Bashar Al – Asad, whose head of Syria. The US foreign policy is not about peace and freedom. It is about turning these nations to stone ages. It is the same foreign policy that the US did in Vietnam. The US went to the Vietnam under banner of peace, freedom and democracy, and turned the region in an inferno of hell.

It is possible to stop the US foreigner’s war machine, when Canada begins to take side with Russia, and involves Russia in foreign trades, and buys military armaments. In regard of lumber, the US caused serious problems for Canada. In regard of military the US caused a serious ethical issues for Canada like F- 35. It can be said that currently the US has no military expansion for Canada because the US needs to this buffer zone with Russia. Thus, it is time to use this moment for Canada to build economic and military ties with Russia in order to stop the US from becoming a global constable. In fact, Canada becomes a middle power that wants to be by means of diplomacy and not war. This will lead the world toward peace, and the current situation would lead to destruction of world.

Justin Trudeau’s actions causes uproar in House

After watching this video clip, I noticed other politicians are harassing Prime Minister of Canada Justin Trudeau. They are the one that they need to apologize to him and not him to others. There are the one who are provoking him, and inviting him for their traps. Wow.

Crowd Mentality – PM Justin Trudeau

The Right Honorable PM of Canada Justin Trudeau is holding the highest office in Canada. Public has high expectation from him to be a good role model because he is representing Canada on a domestic affairs, as well as, foreign affairs. Furthermore, it is interesting to know that he had a passion to follow his father’s foot step. It is clear when he was elected to the Prime Minister’s Office, he asked staff to bring his father’s desk back to the Prime Minister’s Office. He is working diligently to respond to all Canada’s needs. Since 1991, I have been living in Canada, I never seen a politician to work hard like this.
We need to ask ourselves, when PM Trudeau went to Fort McMurray, how did the incident have effect on his mental health?    Emile Durkheim says that external forces are shaping our internal behavior. In addition, is it possible that this passionate man for Canada, and Canadians suffered from some form of crowd mentality? A voice in his head said; let’s move forward and cannot keep Canada behind. More works need to be done.
It is obvious that he suffered from tunnel vision, and auditory exclusion. Now, let’s not judge him for what happened on Wednesday May 19th, 2016 at the House of Common. Let’s be a person of emotional intelligent, and embrace him in our arms. This is the way of life and not hurting him emotionally.

Iran and Iraq

Several days ago this matter came up that where is Iran and how it is different than Iraq.
Where is Iran on the map and what it means.
1. Iran is located in the Middle East. It was known as Persia.
2. In 1930s England and Russia were interfering in domestic affairs of Iran in order to disintegrate Iran among different ethnic groups. Consequently, Reza Shah Pahlavi changed Persia to Iran.
3. Iran means land of noble.
4. Iraq was part of Iran.
5. In the 17th Century Ottoman Empire attacked Persia or Iran, and annexed Iraq from Iran.
6. During World War One Ottoman Empire collapsed and England took over Iraq. In fact, England deprived Iran to regain its land.
7. Iraq’s national language is Arabic.
8. Iran’s national language is Persian.
9. There is a huge difference between Canada and US. It is stemming from its political culture. 1
10. Three wisemen were from Iran or Persia that they were adherent to Zoroastrian faith. This is the first monolithic faith.
End note:

1. https://www.amazon.ca/Search-Canadian-Political-Culture/dp/077481389X

What is Terrorism?

What is Terrorism?

There is always a question in our minds that what is terrorism? In fact, it has two points in it. There is legality question that how to punish those who commit such heinous act which cannot be forgiven by any means. The act of terrorism has caused social unrest to the magnitude that citizens of that nations are at state of panic. Therefore, the central government must ensure social well being of its citizens as Max Weber says that government has monopoly of power to create social order. It can be said confidently that perpetrators would not go without punishment in order to establish social order and security in society.

There is also this side of point that terrorist groups may be held as heroes by others. Since, terrorism is defined as weapon of weak to retaliate against unjust that they endured during their past times. It brings this idea forward that the US in the past dropped two atomic bombs in Japan. Slaughtering three million Vietnamese. Destroying Iraq and turning it into stone ages. Afghanistan will never become a free country and North African nations like Libya will remain in a state of anarchy. Does that make the US a terrorist state or not? Why is the US allow to wage these kind of wars without any kind of United Nations firm responses against the US?

We need peace and love. Not policy of death, destruction and revenge.

What Went Wrong

Former Prime Minister of Canada Stephen Harper astonished me for the economic austerity measure that he took to respond to Canada’s economic problems. I believed, Mr. Harper formulated his policies that they were having harsh tones toward public. He acted in a super critical manner because he earned an economic masters degree from the University of Calgary that his dissertation was stemming from F. A. Hayek’s political economy of libertarianism. Mr. Harper took Hayek’s political economy too seriously, and did not follow the middle ground approach to accomplish his goals.
I read F. A. Hayek’s book “The Road to Serfdom“. This book illustrates how Dr. Hayek’s world view is shaped as a result of his experience of World War Two, and Bismrack’s1 policies. Dr. Hayek believed, private sectors should govern a nation and not governmental bodies because private sectors would build factories around the world, and would provide job opportunities for peoples. Hence, there would be no more wars around the world because private sectors wanted to protect their self – interests, and not destroying them with bombs. Eventually this approach would lead to the perpetual peace of Immanuel Kant who envisioned for humankind. Ayn Rand also advocated a libertarianism because she experienced Tsar ruler of Russia that a system had a policy of military expansion around the world. Thomas Hobbes published “Leviathan” book that he asserted human lives in a nature of state which was in constant state of violence. He asserted human lived a short, brutish, and nasty life. They needed to give – up all their rights, and handed them over to a strong sovereign to govern them for greater good of society. In fact, he told his audience about the way he experienced that epoch.
It appeared to me that Mr. Harper experienced all the above elements of the global affairs, and the domestic affairs at the same time. The domestic affairs and foreign affairs made him to act hastily toward issues rather than acting in calm manner. Canada’s economy in need of repair, and there was a threat of terrorism. There was a need for a strong man to find a solution for all the problems that Canada faced. It could be said confidently that this was the place, where Mr. Harper fell short on his policies that he took the unilateral approach to the problems Canada faced. As a result, Mr. Harper provided an ample window of opportunities to his critic to censure him at every point.  Author Donald Gutstein published a book called “Harperism” and depicted Mr. Harper as a tyrant of Canada who had to be toppled from the Prime Minister’s Office. Author Mel Hurting published a book called “The Arrogant Autocrat“.  The book title was a give away what the author was planning to do with Mr. Harper. This author was going to up – root Mr. Harper in his book at every corner. This book depicted him as a man who destroyed Canada’s democracy. Being less critical, and less vigil anti against Mr. Harper. The above books in my view did not have any academic merits, they were books to confront Bill – 51 and 24. These authors were attempting to claim that Mr. Harper’s policies were disenfranchising Canadians from their Constitutional Rights. Therefore, voters do not vote for him in this up – coming election.
There are two books that they clash with each other very nicely.  Book one, “The Spirit Level: Why Equality is Better for Everyone” by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett against book two “The Spirit Level Delusion” by Christopher Snowdon. Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett used quantitative methods to prove their claims that equality would lead to greater good of society; such as, reducing suicide rate. For example, these authors claimed that the US has more gun problems and higher suicide rate compare to Canada because of social inequality. These authors used numbers to prove their claims by asserting that Canada has universal health care, and everyone is receiving a proper medical health care treatment. As a result, there was less gun problems, and less suicide rate in Canada compare to the US that everything is privatized (you may watch the YouTube video clip that I attached to this forum so that you make your judgement call on issue of gun problems).2 Author Snowdon used fallacy technique to refute Wilkinson and Pickett claims, and sometimes he claimed that the above authors omitted their numbers on the graphs. When I was reading Snowdon’s book I noticed that he was shying away from some of the key arguments of the above authors. In fact, he was proven their claims, and not his claim. For example, when I was reading page 81 of “The Spirit Level Delusion” of Snowdon, I noticed author says “The USA’s high homicide rate is largely driven by black – on – black gun crime and gang activity. The homicide rate for black male victims is 37.59 per 100, 000… Wilkinson and Pickett could no doubt identify inequality as being the ‘root cause’ of black – on – black shooting”. On Sunday Feb 28th, 2016 Oscars event was censured by public for not having an African-American recipient to win a prize from the Oscars event. It means African – American individuals are having difficulty to overcome social barriers which leads to social inequality and gang violence. This is the light that Snowdon does not see. On a more vital note, women are facing glass ceiling, it leads to social inequality in society. It must come to an end for greater good of society.
All in all,  the text book is right, when it says, do not be so hard on your findings, and leave a room for others to breath, and remain at the middle ground. Otherwise, an author would appeared as an arrogant person to others. A claimant needs to be a humble person, and approachable by her/his critics. Now, there is a question for the reader of this paper, am I the black sheep of the family? I think not because Premier of Ontario is empowering vulnerable peoples of Ontario and all powers to her.3 Thank you for reading this long paper, and yes I talk a lot. Now, scroll down to see the picture of what Mr. Harper envisioned for Canada.

The US Foreign Policy Poses Security Threat to the Global Security

When I was in Iran, sometimes in 1987 during early stage of New Year of that year (Iranic peoples around the world celebrate New Year on first day of spring), I went to the Behesht Zahra cemetery in Tehran with my father to pay our respect to his mother. We witnessed a funeral service that a middle aged woman who was crying out-loud and was restless, and could not control her emotions. My father and I overheard heard from others that her sons were killed during Iran and Iraq War. This mother wanted to hug her lifeless bodies, and took them to her home to celebrate their birthdays. She did not want to leave them behind. There was a man in that service who was standing motionless in that area. He was in a state of total disbelief that was unfolding before his eyes. He was looking at three motionless bodies on the ground. This man approached the restless woman, and asked her to clam down. Obviously, he was father of those sons. My father and I walked away from that scene. I did not want my father to experience as that parents did. Thus, I was not interested to go to war.

Reading Erwin Rommel’s “Infantry Attacks” book by Manfred Rommel, he gives a chilling account about his war experience at the time of World War Two. Soldiers are charging at each other with one intention in their minds. To murder one another without faith and mercy. They have forgotten that they are humans and have responsibility to one another and care for one another. The scene of a combat can be felt like this. Comrade watches comrade in pain of death, and they are powerless to provide care for another, if a soldier drops his gun to care for another one, he too will parish by in-coming bullets or bayonet. Once, one military force prevail against another military force, the soldiers are rushing at domestic environment to respond to their savage feelings by killing livestock. Now, the soldiers are looking anything to entertain them like unprotected individuals, in this case women and children are easy target. Women and children are running around to seek safe haven from harms way. This is the power and glory of victory in a war. The nature of war has changed and will never change. This is idea that the war among nations or civil wars are destroying nations, and must come to a total stop, it is not a new idea. It goes back to dawn of history that there were individuals that they oppose wars. It was at the time of Enlightenment Movement that there are idealistic scholars that they formulate doctrine to prevent wars among nations. The leading scholar is Dr. Immanuel Kant who published “Perpetual Peace” and asserted six articles in order to have perpetual peace among nations. In article one, he nullified the notion of war among nations,¹ and asserts that a truce is not the same as peace.² Peace came, when rulers began to use reason and logic to resolve their differences among each other.³ In article two, he defined a nation as a society of embodiment of humans that these nations around the world eventually will tie knots with one another.⁴ Thus, it is wasteful of a nation to allocate such valuable resources toward wars against each other.⁵ In article three, he discussed the political science term of political realism that nations are building strong army as a deterrent measure against one another.⁶ He asserts that the above measure would not reduce hostility among nations or prevent wars among nations. In fact, the above military measurement would lead to some form of war among nations.⁷ Plus, it would cost substantial amount of resources to maintain such image for security of a nation.⁸ In article four, he recommends for the nations not to have debt⁹ “must be a preliminary article for perpetual peace, for eventual yet unavoidable national bankruptcy must entangle many innocent nations, and that would clearly injure them. Consequently, other nations are justified in allying themselves against such a nation and its pretensions.”¹⁰ In article five, Mr. Kant recommended no nation not to interfere in domestic affairs of another nation,¹¹ when a central government is dealing with a civil war.¹² When a foreign nation interfere in the domestic affair of another nation, this action is undermines the security of that nation. The final article is a discussion of the notion of the mutual trust among nations. It is difficult to develop a system of trust among nations.¹³ They are always suspicious about one another that one nation is contemplating to invade that nation.¹⁴ . As a result, nations remain at the state of nature,¹⁵ and no war is unjust.¹⁶ Interestingly, only the winner of the war can declared that the war was unjust,¹⁷ and acted in a good faith to defend itself against unjust war.¹⁸ . The above school of thinking began to shape other scholars in the area of building peace like Wilson Woodrow, Lord Bryce, Jan Smuts as well as other thinkers began to develop an international relation of liberalism by establishing League of Nations in 1920 to prevent World War One. However, the vision of the above scholars succumbed to the vehement of the war mongers. The above vision did not vanish from the surface of the earth. There were other visionary individuals that they pursued the Liberal doctrine, and established the United Nations in 1945. The aim of this paper is to discuss the six articles of Dr. Kant’s to implement perpetual peace in the world, discussing how the US poses security threat to the world, and proving for fact that the US political apparatus as an oligarchy system.

This portion of the paper is discussing the six articles of Dr. Kant’s as a measure to implement perpetual peace in the world. Dr. Kant asserted that the world need to come to a point that war is not an option to resolve differences among nations. Thus, it was the most wasteful of manner to allocate scare resources to solve problems. One way to avoid wars among nations, it would be beneficial not to interfere in domestic affairs of other nations. The above articles are valuable notions to follow in order to prevent wars among nations. It needs to be mentioned that nations wage war against one another due to wealth. For example, in 1980, former president of Iraq, Mr. Saddam Hussein launched military strike in the oil rich of Iran. His military did not invade the part of Iran that did not have oil. Once, Mr. Hussein was defeated from Iran. He annexed Kuwait for a brief period due to its limited natural resource of oil. The above historical account opened the Pandora box for the US foreign policy of expansion in the Middle East. The Saudi Arabia asked the US to deploy its army to its country to push back Iraqi forces from Kuwait so Saudi’s national sovereignty would not be threaten by the Iraqi forces. The US did as the Saudi asked for. The above US military invention did not go so well with other Muslims in the region like Osama Bin Laden, who was fighting the US proxy war in Afghanistan against the Red army of former Soviet Union. Mr. Bin Laden was a pious Muslim man. He believed Islamic doctrine prohibited a non – Muslim person to walk on holy land of the Saudi Arabia. Thus, the US army had to evacuate the region forthwith. He also believed that the Iraq invasion of Kuwait was a matter between Muslims to be resolved. The situation between the East and West began to follow the path of destruction. Mr. Bin Laden was meeting western reporters in Afghanistan or Pakistan and he was giving them interviews that how God was on his side, and one day the Islam will prevail in the west. He uttered statements that they caused serious concern among ordinary individuals. He was talking about death and destruction. He was not talking about resolve differences among nations until September 11^th, 2001 came and the US found itself in the middle of mayhem as what appeared terrorists were blowing up buildings in the US. The US used this occasion and declared war against Afghanistan for harboring terrorism. The US forces drilled Afghanistan within a short time frame. Eventually, Mr. Bin Laden was killed by the US Special Forces.

Mr. Hussein was identified by the US intelligent service for developing weapon of mass destruction, and this matter must top. What the world needs to know that the US supplied Iraq during 1983 by Donald Rumsfeld with weapon of mass destruction to drop on Iranian armies.¹⁹ The US contributed to the Iran and Iraq War, and made benefit from it.

Coming to the focal point of this portion of the paper that Mr. Hussein claimed he did not own weapon of mass destruction. The US interpreted the article 51 of the United Nations in this light that the US was facing terrorist attack from Iraq. Thus, it was justifiable for the US to attack at Iraq, and liberate Iraqi peoples from tyrannical regime of Mr. Hussein. The US also claim that Iraq peoples would have democracy and freedom.

On March 23^rd, 2003 the US invaded Iraq, and the Bath Party of Mr. Hussein collapsed. When Mr. Hussein’s regime collapsed, it contributed to the power vacuum. The other factions that they were deprived for a long time from political life, they used violence against each other to control political realm of Iraq. The turmoil in Iraq escalated, and led to sectarian violence among Iraqi peoples. To this day, Iraqi people have not seen a day of peace.

This portion of the paper is discussing how the US poses security threat to the world. In the 1996, Dr. Samuel Huntington developed the Clash of Civilization theory.²⁰ In his theory he asserts that in the post Cold War era, nations would engage in military strikes against each other based on past fault lines or past grievances.²¹ One of his prominent ideas encompasses current affairs of the White House that the West and the East clash with one another because of the history of colonization, and how the Western powers colonized the Eastern nations. Hence, the Eastern nations will respond to the past injustices that they endured at the hands of the Western powers. There is some truth in what he says that the past political affairs are preventing the Western nations from building a peace bridge with the Eastern nations.

In the year 2000, the New American Century think–tank organization drafted a manifesto called “Rebuilding America’s Defense.” This document took an assertive position for upcoming years of the US in the global stage to play the role of the global constable by toppling regimes in Libya, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and Iran. This policy of the US took in effect. This US Foreign policy, after September 11^th, 2001 when the twin towers in New York City were brought down by two airplanes, and the Pentagon was struck by an airplane. The above act catalyzed the US foreign policy of expansion around the world.

As a result of the War on Terror, it has caused the Western nations to be afraid of Muslims that they are here in the west to harm them. Dr. Fuller asserts that Muslims around the world are not one nation or a kingdom.²² The faith of Islam is not a homogeneous one.²³ There is deep diversity in the faith of Islam.²⁴ It divided into two sects. Sunni (means traditionalist that those individuals adherent to this faith, they are following the path of Muhammad who elected Abu Bakr as his successor, and not Ali his cousin) Sect and Shia (means minority. There is a claim that Muhammad elected Ali as his successor because Ali was his cousin) Sect. Each sect divides into different school of thoughts. Furthermore, Dr. Fuller proves his claim by referring to the time, when Tsar Aleksandr Nevsky reigned as monarch of Russia, and Tatars as well as Mongols were trying to invade Russia. In this historical moment of trial and tribulation. Muslims took side of Russia, and fought back with other Muslims to preserve national integrity of Russia.²⁵ Dr. Fuller asserts that current Islam, and the West dilemma is stemming from the US’s foreign policy “as it may be to American ears, the Byzantine scholars Vasilios Markrides at the University of Erfurt argues that “anti – Westernism reached its peak in the violent anti – American attacks of the 11^th September 2001 in the United States. These forms of anti – Westernism are mostly the direct corollary of the Western political, economic and cultural expansion across the world in modern times in the wake of imperialism and colonialism.”²⁶ Thus, it is important to follow Immanuel Kant’s doctrine to have a global peace to avoid wars among nations.

This portion of the paper is proving for fact that the US political apparatus as an oligarchy system. The US is continuously violating article five of Perpetual Peace Theory that no nation to interfere in domestic affair of other nations. Since, World War Two, the US is assuming that it has prerogative right to have the global leadership position with prime intention of envision the world that suits its agenda best. The Vietnam War is the prime example that how the US engaged in a war with Vietnam under banner of freedom. In fact, the war in the Vietnam was not about freedom. This was a proxy war between Russia and US. The former Soviet Union was providing military aid to North Vietnamese to fight off the US force in the south of Vietnam. Eventually, the US lost the war to the North Vietnamese. Dr. Ron Dart from the University of the Fraser Valley asserts that the US involvement in the Vietnam as a form of terrorism.²⁷ In addition, “fragmented opposition defeat Meciar in 1998; in Serbia, U.S. and European assistance helped level the playing field by financing independent media, opposition activities’ salaries, and a massive get – out – the – vote campaign … US officials help unify anti – Sandinista forces, select a presidential candidate, and run a national election campaign.”²⁸ Simply, it can be said that the world is moving in the direction of the US agenda under slogan of freedom.

Dr. John McCormick in his book “Machiavellian Democracy” uses Machiavelli’s insightful information about human psychology, as well as, two different types of political systems, one is democracy, and last one is a republic system. According to Machiavelli the above system will start off as will of people. However, eventually, these systems will lead to an oligarchy system. The bedrock of Machiavelli’s claim that the above system will be transformed from will of people to an oligarchy system, it stems from public that plebs opinion shift from one moment to another moment²⁹ “for favoring an individual one day, and then condemning him for another; for pledging allegiance to a prince one minute and then cheering for liberty next.”³⁰ Machiavelli explains that a democracy is about popular will of people that they put their trust in hands of aristocrats as well as the elites.³¹ As a result, the aristocrats and the elites will act in their self – interest and not what public wants and needs.

Machiavelli places institutions in his political theory to prevent a system from moving from a popular government to an oligarchy.³² However, there are political actors that they shift public opinion from one point to another point by using the notion of liberty. This is the area that Machiavelli has concern with.

Dr. Jeffrey A. Winters in his book “Oligarchy” explains that there are four types of oligarchy systems. One, warring oligarchy, two, ruling oligarchy three, sultanistic oligarchy, and last, civil oligarchy.³³ One reason that an oligarch system emerges, it is as an result of power vacuum in a political system. Dr. Winters uses African nations to illustrates his point that how warlords are in conflict with each other to gain power in order to establish their own regime. Once, one warlords is able to hold on power, he begins to use violence to remain in power. Dr. Winters also discusses Suharto’s regime and Marcus regime in Philippine that they are having similar resemblance for their formation. Suharto toppled an establishment by means of a military coup, and formed a junta government. He took control over means of economy as well as its security. It contributed to economic stagnation of the nation. Eventually, his regime collapsed under economic pressure. In case of Marcus, he assassinated head of state, and formed a junta government. He too controlled Philippine’s means of economy and security system. His regime was toppled due to economic factors. Only handful of individuals were enjoying from luxury lifestyle while others were deprived from basic necessity of life. The US domestic policy is not any different than the above nations. Dr. Winters explains that the “Oligarchy is focused specifically on the political struggles related to wealth defense. In the U.S. Context, as elsewhere … the central question is whether and how the wealthiest citizens deploy unique and concentrated power resources to defend their unique minority interests.”³⁴ The author further claims that the US system in the US is complex to understand, and easily manipulated by lawyers so that their clients to avoid paying taxes to the government.³⁵ Dr. Winters research indicates that the 90% at the bottom of social stratification make four times less than top 10% of the population.³⁶ Therefore, the US domestic policy has its own problems, and cannot claim that other nations are despising it because of its democracy. The US should not act as a champion of human rights since 90% of population is living in some sort of poverty.

Dr. Steven Levitsky is a pro – US foreign policy around the world. He explains that the NATO military intervention in Kosovo cost $30 to $40 billion dollars damage to the economy.³⁷ It needs to be mentioned that this nation is still at stage of developing nation. The US version of democracy has done no good to this nation to prosper. There are other nations that the US military intervention have left them destitute.

In conclusion, the US domestic system is a civil oligarchy. It should not hold a mega phone, and tells others that it wants to impose its system to them. Obviously, these military interventions are costly for two reason. The US taxpayers are paying their government to drop bombs on other nations in the name of democracy. This military intervention does not do any good, in fact, it is destroying infrastructure of nations. Last, there is human cost and brain-drain a nation faces as a result of war.

It needs to be mentioned that this democracy system is nothing but an illusion for people. Dr. Robert Dahl in his book “Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition” says that a democracy system responds to people’s needs to be elected to office. Once, politicians are in office, they develop public policies to control public or they have enforcement bodies to control public in order to submit to will of state.

1Kant, Immanuel. Perpetual Peace and Other Essays. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing company, 1983. 107.

2Kant, Immanuel. Perpetual Peace and Other Essays. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing company, 1983. 107.

3Kant, Immanuel. Perpetual Peace and Other Essays. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing company, 1983. 107.

4Kant, Immanuel. Perpetual Peace and Other Essays. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing company, 1983. 108.

5Kant, Immanuel. Perpetual Peace and Other Essays. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing company, 1983. 108.

6Kant, Immanuel. Perpetual Peace and Other Essays. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing company, 1983. 108.

7Kant, Immanuel. Perpetual Peace and Other Essays. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing company, 1983. 108.

8Kant, Immanuel. Perpetual Peace and Other Essays. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing company, 1983. 108.

9Kant, Immanuel. Perpetual Peace and Other Essays. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing company, 1983. 109.

10Kant, Immanuel. Perpetual Peace and Other Essays. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing company, 1983. 109.

11Kant, Immanuel. Perpetual Peace and Other Essays. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing company, 1983. 109.

12Kant, Immanuel. Perpetual Peace and Other Essays. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing company, 1983. 109.

13Kant, Immanuel. Perpetual Peace and Other Essays. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing company, 1983. 109.

14Kant, Immanuel. Perpetual Peace and Other Essays. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing company, 1983. 109.

15Kant, Immanuel. Perpetual Peace and Other Essays. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing company, 1983. 110.

16Kant, Immanuel. Perpetual Peace and Other Essays. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing company, 1983. 110.

17Kant, Immanuel. Perpetual Peace and Other Essays. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing company, 1983. 110.

18Kant, Immanuel. Perpetual Peace and Other Essays. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing company, 1983. 110.

19The National Security Archive <http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/> 17 March 2016

20Huntington, Samuel. The Clash of Civilization and the Remaking of World Order. Printed in the US: Simon & Schuster, 2011.

21Huntington, Samuel. The Clash of Civilization and the Remaking of World Order. Printed in the US: Simon & Schuster, 2011.

22Fuller, Graham. A World without Islam. New York, New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2010. 174.

23Fuller, Graham. A World without Islam. New York, New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2010.

24Fuller, Graham. A World without Islam. New York, New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2010.

25Fuller, Graham. A World without Islam. New York, New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2010. 156.

26Fuller, Graham. A World without Islam. New York, New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2010. 156.

27Dart, Ron. Keepers of the Flame: Canadian Red Toryism. Print in Canada: Fermentation Press Inc., 2012. 26.

28Levitsky, Steven, Lucan Way. Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes After the Cold War. New York, NY: Cambridge University, 2010. 49.

29McCormick, John. Machiavellian Democracy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2011.76.

30McCormick, John. Machiavellian Democracy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2011.76.

31McCormick, John. Machiavellian Democracy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2011.78.

32McCormick, John. Machiavellian Democracy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2011.107.

33Winters, Jeffrey .Oligarchy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2011.

34Winters, Jeffrey .Oligarchy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2011. 211.

35Winters, Jeffrey .Oligarchy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2011. 214.

36Winters, Jeffrey .Oligarchy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2011. 214.

37Levitsky, Steven, Lucan Way. Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes After the Cold War. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2010. 109.