PNN – “National Interest” wrote in an analysis pointing to the intensification of the alignment between China, Iran, Russia and North Korea against the United States and the ineffectiveness of calling the enemies of the United States the “Axis of Evil”: These countries have a negative bias towards America and especially its foreign policy and do not understand the special role of America in international affairs.
According to the report of Pakistan News Network, Paul J. Sanders, the head of the National Interest Center in America, wrote in a note published in this American publication: America and its allies face new challenges from four countries, China, Iran, Russia and North Korea, both individually and collectively.
Referring to the confusion of Washington to deal with the political problems caused by the cooperation between these countries, the author raises another problem, which is that America can no longer call its enemies “axis of evil” like in the past.
He writes in part of this article: Some would like to introduce America’s enemies as the new “Axis of Evil” and reverse George W. Bush’s (former US President) two-decade label on Iran, Iraq and North Korea. But using diabolical rhetoric, such as trying to define international relations as a semi-apocalyptic struggle between democracies and authoritarian states, makes America’s job harder. Such rhetoric reduces the opportunity to exploit existing gaps among US enemies whose interests are not the same. Meanwhile, Beijing, Moscow, Tehran and Pyongyang are each trying to create a gap between Washington and the capitals of its allies.
This analysis continues: Another weakness of being called the “axis of evil” is that the US has allies and partners whose behavior does not conform to US (alleged) standards for democracy and/or human rights. Moreover, as America must work with more partners to defeat its enemies, it will strive to reach even such allies. A new Economist assessment describes just over 14 percent of the world’s countries as “full democracies,” about 30 percent as “flawed democracies,” and nearly 56 percent as “hybrid regimes” or autocracies.
Read more:
The author added implicitly the claim that democracy in America is “full democracy”: Since it is unlikely that the United States will be able to effectively confront its enemies with the support of only 14% of governments; Those who want Washington to succeed in garnering international support for its goals must hope that it will be able to attract the support of even semi-democratic or even completely undemocratic governments.
In another part of this analysis, it is stated: Some argue that the clear moral stance of former US President Ronald Reagan, who referred to the Soviet Union as an “evil empire” in a 1983 speech, was instrumental in defining the conflict between the United States and its superpower adversary. The important point is that in several paragraphs of his historical statement, Reagan addressed America’s behavior with these words and said: Our nation also has a legacy of evil that must be dealt with. There should be no place for racism, anti-Semitism or other forms of ethnic and racial hatred in this country.
Modern Republican politicians routinely scoff at such “apologies,” Saunders wrote, pointing to current US leaders moving away from what he described as “Reagan humility.”
He went on to suggest the acronym CRANK, which is reminiscent of the beginning of the names of China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea, and explained the three basic components of alignment between these four countries as follows: First of all, these four countries are hostile towards America and especially its foreign policy, and they do not accept the idea that America should have a special role in international affairs.
The author also claims: The next common point between these four countries is that the officials of these countries often resemble conspiracy theorists. This is especially evident in the way the four governments describe the behavior and goals of the United States, and finally, in the fact that they wish their countries to become levers that can attract the wider attention of the international system. Chinese and Russian officials often express this view, and seem to see their governments as instruments that create a post-American era.
At the end of this analysis, it is stated: these four countries are not a quadrangular group and most of their cooperation is bilateral; Such as the diplomatic coordination between China and Russia and the military and commercial exercises between these two countries, the sale of North Korean weapons to Russia, or China’s economic support for North Korea. Among them are rare trilateral events, including China, Russia, and Iran’s naval exercise in the Oman Sea. However, naming them as a group can give these countries more cohesion, as has happened with the Association of Emerging Economic Powers (RICS).