In the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States, many critics began to argue that the country was using the tragic event as a catalyst to establish itself as the next global empire. This notion was fueled by various actions taken by the US government in the years following 9/11, which seemed to indicate a desire for increased influence and control on the world stage.
One of the key items used by critics to support this claim was the US invasion of Iraq in 2003. Despite there being no direct link between Iraq and the 9/11 attacks, the Bush administration used the event as a justification for toppling Saddam Hussein's regime. Critics argued that this was a clear example of the US using its military power to assert dominance in the Middle East.
Another item that fueled the belief in US imperial ambitions was the establishment of military bases in various countries around the world. The US has a significant military presence in countries such as Japan, Germany, and South Korea, among others. Critics saw this as evidence of the US seeking to exert its influence globally and maintain control over key strategic regions.
Furthermore, the US government's use of drone strikes in countries like Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Yemen also raised concerns among critics. These targeted killings were seen as a way for the US to assert its authority and control over perceived threats, without regard for the sovereignty of other nations. Critics argued that this demonstrated a willingness to act unilaterally and outside the bounds of international law.
The US' pursuit of free trade agreements, such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), also played into the narrative of US imperialism. Critics claimed that these agreements were designed to benefit US corporations and expand American influence in the global economy, at the expense of other countries.
Additionally, the US' increased surveillance activities, as revealed by whistleblower Edward Snowden, furthered suspicions of imperial ambitions. The widespread monitoring of communications both domestically and internationally was seen as a way for the US to maintain control and suppress dissent, both at home and abroad.
Critics also pointed to the US' support for authoritarian regimes in the Middle East and elsewhere as evidence of its imperialist tendencies. By propping up dictators and oppressive governments, the US was accused of prioritizing its own interests over human rights and democracy, in pursuit of global dominance.
The Islamic State, al-Qaeda-linked groups, Boko Haram and other extremist movements are protagonists in today's deadliest crises, serving as a justification for US military interventions and bolstering the idea of American imperialism. Critics argue that the US has used the threat of terrorism as a pretext for expanding its military presence and influence in regions where these groups operate.
In conclusion, the US' actions in the years following 9/11 have been scrutinized by critics who believe that the country is actively seeking to establish itself as a new global empire. From military interventions to trade agreements to surveillance activities, various items have been used to support this claim. Whether or not the US is truly pursuing imperial ambitions remains a topic of debate, but the evidence presented by critics is certainly compelling.
