Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
The diagram isn't intended to explain any one client state's policy formulation. It isn't intended to represent or evaluate any one client state's sovereign competencies.

It is a simplified "decision tree" model of US rules to evaluate any foreign event dependency on US imperial cooperation. Conditional tests (boolean results, Y/N) prescribe US action at any given point in time. But all event "branching" begins with one question (Is the country a client state?) and terminates at the US desired outcome: That is control of a state's domestic and foreign policies to serve "American Empire" (pink boxes).

Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Angola are all children of the US "enemy state" branch of so-called clients. All have entertained communist domestic and foreign policies since WWII. They didn't "move." US/NATO Cold War aggression repeated "foreign policy" events.

NODE N: Angola 1975, Afghanistan 1979-91, Syria 2011, (US) "support of insurgent forces"
NODE R: Afghanistan 2001 +17, Libya 2011 +7, Syria 2014 +4, (US) "aid to armed opposition forces"

All of them have attempted over the period to avert destruction --or appease the US-- by varying degrees of bribery, occupation, ingratiation, and "collaboration"  and have failed. a/o today. What's odd isn't US-designated "dictator" paranoia, it's the number of so-called clients like Lebanon that are missing.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

by Cat on Sat Jun 2nd, 2018 at 06:13:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:


Occasional Series