The unreliable allies of the West in the fight against terrorism

The continuous development of the political and military events in the international arena, puts the West in front of questions that you can not not provide adequate answers. Since the end of the cold war, the consequences of which have been interpreted, now it can be said, wrongly in a positive sense, the dramatic changes in the diplomatic caused a continuous rollover of positions that were believed consolidated and that they should promote world peace through balances durable. But it was not so. Paradoxically, the situation still the Cold War, with two distinct opposing blocks, provided a clear view of the big picture, on which they had to act big, medium and small powers. Currently, on the contrary we are witnessing the entry of new international players, which, while not nations in the classic sense, act in terms of sovereignty over portions of the territories defined and exert military force, together with the usual methods for alternative uses and outside of the area that are attributed, typical of the movements defined commonly terrorist. The reference to this case concerns the Islamic state in Syria and Iraq, but we can not forget Al Shabab, which operates in Somalia and Ethiopia, Boko Haram in Nigeria, the Islamic cohorts in Libya and the Taliban in Afghanistan. Against the armies of these government-sponsored entities were engaged regular armies, which often have failed to have reason, helping with these failures, to enhance its prestige in front of an audience often formed by religious adherents, both of fundamentalist inspiration, both of I believe more moderate. It is clear that these movements have taken advantage of the dissatisfaction of the masses, who often came from dictatorial rulers and were in extreme poverty and lack of culture, especially politics, and the fact that the statement of these formations has coincided with the failure of the Arab Spring is one of the most indicative. However, only these arguments are not enough to explain the success of such radicalism, without detracting from the talent to have been able to channel the anger of Muslims, the financial effort made by some countries, which have supported the establishment and expansion was decisive. After it is not clear if these creatures out of hand to those who think they control them through financial instruments, or if these countries continue to direct them and direct them to their own purposes, betraying alliance relationships that last for years. The most striking case concerns the United States and their relationship with states like Saudi Arabia and Turkey, whose alliance is of long standing, but relations have been cracked, especially since the US has been conducting negotiations for the Iranian nuclear generating a great resentment in the Sunni countries. This, together with the ambition to steal Syria is Shiite influence in the birth of the Islamic State, resulting from the exponential growth of more fundamentalist movements of the mold. Several times the United States has sought an agreement with the two major countries of the Sunni without going over to solutions that would guarantee just the appearance of the image official. The unreliability of these countries, moreover, is not the only case in the framework of the Western alliance, just remember Pakistan, where bin Laden took refuge, which has vast sectors of its administration compromises with Islamic radicalism. The needs of tactical, strategic and diplomatic force certainly make a show of acrobatics as part of international relations, but it would be necessary to apply mostly made rigid criteria to select allies. Nations such as Saudi Arabia and, in general, the Gulf monarchies, have no sufficient requirements on the guarantee of the presence of the business and the implementation of human and civil rights, we speak, that is, states where adultery involves stoning , there is no press freedom and dissent is punished with prison and even death. A serious deterioration in the situation of international terrorism has to raise the question if these conditions were not helped also by the continuous reports that Western states have and are taking with nations that should be totally excluded from any international forum where they sit mature democracies. Certainly these concepts can be opposed to the goodness of the theory contrasts with the effects of the practical life. It is an assumption that we can not unfortunately contradict: the West has enjoyed the stabilizing effects that the regimes, then defeated by the Arab Spring, assured their balances, first economic and then political. This highlights how it has been used the time following the end of the colonial possessions, to foster democratic transitions, but take advantage of the presence of the dictator of the moment that guaranteed easy access to the resources of the state former colony. So you come unprepared to the Arab Spring and their failure, a condition that has united all the West and on this assumption we should question the competence of the rulers of the nations of Europe and North America. As evidence of this, see the case of Egypt, where it was viewed favorably the establishment of a military dictatorship, to avoid having also the country ruled by an Egyptian Muslim training, with the danger of opening a military front very dangerous, because the Israeli border. The considerations about establishing universal parameters to establish alliances can therefore exist only on paper and it is also true that the West can not shut himself away from any danger, because from here comes the globalization that has decreased the 'effectiveness of the borders; think rigidly separate worlds is now impossible, even if it means having the case of Islamic terrorism within the state borders. To remedy the current situation should have time and think about the long term, which must be done, but in parallel with faster solutions, making it possible to ease the tension and wars. In this perspective, in addition to the diplomatic work you have to find ways to reduce or stop the supply of arms to all those states, even allies, who do not have the sufficient democratic guarantees and does not share the goals of international politics; secondly it is necessary to seek a greater energy independence, to steal oil revenues from the circuit of the financing of terrorism. It is not about simple things, but they are required to have a network of allies more responsive to the same Western targets, which will still have to adapt to a greater respect for the reasons of the other states, by holding the discrimination needed to avoid an alliance with possible supporters of terrorism.