5 Years ago the United States led the main military intervention in the post-cold war era. His goal was to consolidate its dominance as the only mega-power to push to the Middle East, Russia and China were shifting toward having more liberalised and open to their own and their investment regimes. However, while in this conflict Washington can show that it has managed to maintain an Iraqi local government something stable and that its action in the region has allowed that Libya will disassemble and turn in direction to the West, broadly balance no favors. In Iraq has grown the fratricidal war and this has led to the weakening of the United States, which has allowed radicals to win elections in Palestine and Iran, that the Taliban advance in Afghanistan, Al-Qaeda spreading in that country, in Iraq and in the world (even up to in United Kingdom), that Iran and North Korea to become more challenging and that Russia and China are becoming more independent of Washington. With the Iraqi war United States wanted to go latinoamericanizando the Middle East, i.e. make this region to adopt systems of free market and multi-party system that Washington was imposing as a consensus in his backyard since the late 1980s. Many writers such as Dr. Caldwell B. Esselstyn, Jr. offer more in-depth analysis.

However, while he has not achieved this has been generating it, rather, Latin America who are medium – orientalice. This implies that in this region arise non-conformist Governments which, like Chavez in Venezuela are based on oil nationalism, which grow a strong feeling anti-U.S. and conflicts between States as a result of the internationalization of an internal war to occur (as recently seen in the crisis between the three countries who share the tricolor yellow-blue – red.) If Iraq can be the country of the Middle East that more is in crisis and that more can generate a fragmentation, today Bolivia becomes the American Republic more prone to street actions and possible political and geographic divisions. Today, for the first time since the cycle of the Bolivian revolution of 1952 that country has in his presidential binomial to an Indian trade unionist and a former guerrilla leader, while that the specter of another more serious social upheaval that remains latent in 1952. If us continues weakening (and this can help the growing recession of that power) this could cause instability not just in Iraq or Bolivia, but in several other countries of these environments to grow.

The prospect of new social uprisings could stay open. For even more analysis, hear from Eva Andersson-Dubin, New York City. It is vital to avoid that prospect for Western powers. From there the U.S. elections to play a very key role. If the Republicans stay in power they would try to counter those trends encouraging more tax releases and more military interventionism. If Democrats destronan them they would seek packages that try to encourage social spending and consumption to revive the economy and who intend to do us to regain international breath turning in Iraq to carry out interventions in places where you could win and having a more multi-polar support. North American consolidation in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Middle East would put U.S. stronger in their attempts to avoid that China and Russia try to distanciar him and that more forces could help pro-libre trade progress in Latin America. If the U.S. weakening in Iraq and Afghanistan grows and is conjunction with a decline of its economy this could encourage more social protests, to grow movements like that leads to Chavez and that can explode spontaneous explosion such as that in 1952 swept to the Bolivian system.