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  doesnt  it  want  Europe  to  be  united  and
independent of the US? This problem becomes more urgent  nowadays  when  the
American influences 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 couldnt 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 Spikesmans 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 NATOs 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
NATOs last campaign, the U.K. and the US destabilized an  ethnic  situation
in Europe, because during the NATOs  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 its 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  Blairs
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 Trumans 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 KFORs patrols, occupying Macedonian  territory  and  assaulting  tetovo
while the NATOs 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 UCKs thugs (or does not want to do it) and has  to  allow  the  Federal
troops of Yugoslavia to patrol Kosovos 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 NATOs troops  into  the
Eurounions 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  USs
      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:
         > Case Study
         > Adapting
         > Analysis
         > Making Conclusions
         > Making Comparisons and Analogies.





"The political role of Great Britain in modern world"