Доклад: The political role of Great Britain in modern world

Доклад: The political role of Great Britain in modern world

school # 5

The political role of Great Britain in modern world

by Timur Saatashvili, 11 “A” grade

English teacher:

Altynova Galina Anatolyevna

Ryazan, 2001

The political role of Great Britain in modern world.

Analyzing the current world political situation I wonder why since the

beginning of the twentieth century Great Britain, a colonial empire in the

past, been losing its influence in the world step by step and nowadays it is

worth speaking not about the British political but merely about holding its

own current stand? Why doesn’t it want Europe to be united and independent of

the US? This problem becomes more urgent nowadays when the American

influence’s weakening and the political opponent which prevents us from being

a full member of the European society. The U.K. takes part in all

international committees in Chechnya. Its territory is used by lots of anti –

Russian Wakhabbist organizations that provides Chechen terrorists and

separatists. Its subversive activities have the only aim to isolate Russia.

And I couldn’t help taking such a theme where I will analyze the British

policy, explain it and try to find alternatives for the English foreign

political line.

After the Second World War England lost its political independence, becoming

an American satellite.

Forming the Anglo – American alliance was especially influenced by the so –

called Americanocentrist conceptions by Zbignev Bzhezinski and Nicholas

Spikesman.

According to Spikesman’s theory, the geographical authority of any state

takes shape by not its inland territories, but coastline. He emphasizes three

large centers of world power: the Atlantic Seashore of North America and

Europe and the Far East of Eurasia. These territories were called a rimland.

This way Great Britain and the US must from an alliance and that was done

soon.

Being an American ally, England has become a reliable Fifth Column in the

European Union. The British government has been trying its best to prevent

Europe from unifying processes, once protesting against founding European

Central Bank and the singe European currency “euro” and attempting together

with the US to quarrel the European states with one another and to direct

their aggression against the third one like Yugoslavia. Due to its pro –

American foreign policy, Great Britain has become the second leader of the

North Atlantic Treaty Organization. right now the U.K. and the US are at the

head of all NATO’s military operations, like “The Shield of the desert”, “The

Storm in the desert”, in 1991, “The Fox in the desert” in 1998 and the anti –

Yugoslavian aggression in 1999. Speaking about the NATO’s last campaign, the

U.K. and the US destabilized an ethnic situation in Europe, because during

the NATO’s bombardments tens and thousands of thousands of Albanian refugees

poured into Germany, Albania and some other countries. That needs no saying,

the Albanians from Kosovo and Methokia complicated the social – political

situation in these states. Its result was the criminal increase and the

growth of unemployment among the immigrants.

This way we can make the only confusion: the foreign policy of Great Britain

(i.e. the US) in Europe has the aim to weaken the main integrating power –

Russia and Germany as much as possible.

As fro Germany, being a powerful state, it is spreading its economic

influence in Chechia, Slovakia and especially in Chernogoria where President

Milo Dzuganovich put DM in circulation instead of the Yugoslavian dinar.

Of course, it has weakened the British authority in the Balkan region very

much, and the English government cannot ignore it. Unfortunately, the U.K.‘s

forgotten it’s not a world power. That is why its actions against every anti

– British demarche of European countries are extremely hasty and

asymmetrical. Remember Prime – Minister of Great Britain Anthony Blair’s

intention of liquidating Russian landing troops in 1999 after having occupied

Slatino airport in Prishtina. To my mind it is clear what consequences would

have taken place after that.

But why is the British foreign policy so anti – German – Russian? The work

“The Geographical Axis of History” by English scientist Halfrod McKinder

answers it. According to his theory the alliance of Russia and Germany to

struggle for the world power against Great Britain and the US is extremely

dangerous and fatal for the last ones. Well now it is clear why the buffer of

averagly developed countries between Russia and Germany was formed and what

“Truman’s doctrine” was based on.

Thus nowadays the Anglo – American alliance has achieved its aim, dividing

our states and making our relations rather difficult and cool.

Following the American foreign political way, England must carry the mutal

responsibility for their blunders. The same situation is taking place in

Kosovo and Metkhia now. Due to the Anglo – American pro – Albanian and anti –

Serbian policy the UCK becomes more and more impudent, firing gat the KFOR’s

patrols, occupying Macedonian territory and assaulting tetovo while the

NATO’s doing nothing to protect Kosovo and Macedonia and to defeat the UCK

because of being only very anxious for its soldiers and nothing more. This

way, after the Anglo – American carrions crows’ triumphant air raids to

Serbia the NATO cannot cope with a small group of the UCK’s thugs (or does

not want to do it) and has to allow the Federal troops of Yugoslavia to

patrol Kosovo’s part of Yugoslavian – Macedonian boundaries near Preshevo.

Such an embarrassing and foolish situation, of course, has damaged the

British authority in the world.

The prospects of the British co – operation with other states.

As a matter of fact there are only two alternatives of the British foreign

political development. The first one is changing nothing but England should

know nowadays most political analysists agree that soon playing the role of

a sort of a oikumena, the US will exert itself to the utmost. The American

industry and production cannot compete with the European ones not only in the

world but even in its domestic American market. It is the beginning of the

political and economic degradation of the USA without which the U.K. means

nothing. And it is out of question, no European state will want to deal with

the former American satellite. The British future is awful, I think.

But there is the second way: a very close both political and economic co –

operation with the Eurounion. Well, and what would Great Britain be able to

propose? firstly, the reorganization of the NATO’s troops into the

Eurounion’s ones, liquidation of the American military bases in Europe;

secondly, substituting dollars for “euros” in golden currency reserves of the

European states.

But what way will Great Britain prefer? Time will show.

Well, you see I have proved my hypothesis. In my work I have come to the

following conclusion unconsoling for Great Britain:

1. It does not run its own independent foreign policy, being

the US’s puppet;

2. Its pro – American position antagonizes other European

states;

3. The British government must change its foreign policy as

quickly as it is possible.

The list of used literature.

1. Encyclopedia for Children “Avanta +”, volume # 12

“Russia”, p. 640 – 642.

2. Encyclopedia for Children “Avanta +”, volume # 1 “World

History”, p. 610 – 613, 657 – 658.

3. Encyclopedia for Children “Avanta +”, volume # 13 “States,

Peoples, Civilizations”, p. 129, 246, 272, 276, 367, 369.

4. “Politicians and Rulers”. T. Varlamova, p. 506.

5. “Russia: the 20-th century. Politics and Culture”. N.

Starikov, p. 410.

6. “The Geographical Axis of History”. H. McKinder.

7. “The Politology”. M. Marchenko, p. 375.

This way I have put forward the following hypothesis: the political authority

of Great Britain is nominal nowadays.

To prove it I have used the following methods of getting the material:

Ø Case Study

Ø Adapting

Ø Analysis

Ø Making Conclusions

Ø Making Comparisons and Analogies.