Narcos

Teh Erosion of Liberal Norms: From Guantánamo to the Trump Era

The enduring presence ​of Guantánamo Bay detention camp, even after pledges to close it, serves as a stark reminder of a shift⁤ in ⁢American political practice. While the fate ‌of detainees like ⁢Hambali remains uncertain, the camp​ itself represents ⁢a lasting challenge to traditional American⁣ ideals. This challenge isn’t a sudden aberration, but rather a culmination of a growing ‌impatience ​with the perceived constraints of liberal democracy – a desire for direct action over procedural norms,​ and a willingness to prioritize coercion alongside consent.

This impatience was evident in the political landscape⁤ that led to both the re-election of George W. bush and the subsequent election of ⁤Donald Trump. Both events signaled a rejection​ of what some perceive as the “kayfabe” of politics – the carefully constructed performance of democratic ideals. This rejection manifested in a willingness to ⁣embrace more forceful,less constrained approaches to national security and foreign policy.

Trump’s presidency marked ⁣a significant break from the post-world War II ⁣tradition of subtly masking⁣ the realities‌ of American power. He and his ‌supporters openly acknowledged the inherent power dynamics at ‌play in international relations, a departure from the post-war practice⁤ of presenting American military action as‍ a benevolent​ force. This⁢ shift was ‌symbolically underscored by Trump’s executive order ‌to revert ⁤the‌ Department of Defense ​back to its historical name, the “Department⁣ of War.” The 1947 name change had been ⁤intended to project a more peaceful image, but the Trump management sought to reclaim a more direct and⁣ assertive portrayal of American strength.

This wasn’t simply about projecting power; it was about revealing what proponents believe to⁢ be⁤ the basic nature of​ the state – an entity primarily focused on protecting and enriching its own citizens, even if that comes⁤ at the expense of universal ⁤ideals. The perceived failings of the system to deliver on these promises for all but the wealthiest were, in ⁣this view, secondary to the assertion of national ​power. The rhetorical commitment to liberal myths, exposed by Guantánamo, was largely abandoned.

The continued operation of Guantánamo itself highlights the increasing unaccountability of the American security state. Despite Trump’s rhetoric about challenging the “deep state,” the security apparatus aligned ‍with his administration to ⁤further dismantle the ‌pretense of upholding procedural justice and universal rights. The institutional structures ⁣established during the War on Terror – executive ‍secrecy, legal improvisation, and extrajudicial killings ⁤- remained firmly in place.

This‌ trend was exemplified by ⁢a recent incident were U.S. forces destroyed a vessel ‌off the coast of Venezuela, resulting in eleven fatalities. the⁢ administration framed the action⁣ as a counterterrorism operation, echoing the justifications⁢ used for indefinite detention at Guantánamo.The President shared a drone video of the strike,showcasing the targeted vessel before it was destroyed.

Adding ⁣a layer of complexity, the Venezuelan government alleged the footage was “AI-generated propaganda,” perhaps altered to amplify the impact of the strike. Regardless of the veracity ⁤of these claims, ⁤the incident underscores a disturbing reality: the President is deploying lethal force in legally ambiguous circumstances, without meaningful congressional oversight or public debate.

Like Guantánamo, the bombing of the Venezuelan boat was‌ not solely about achieving a tactical objective; it was a performance intended to demonstrate power and resolve. Though, unlike the initial secrecy surrounding Guantánamo, this action was publicly broadcast on social media. Guantánamo began⁤ as an exception to established rules, ⁤but over the past two ⁣decades, it has evolved into a testing ground ⁢for the limits ⁣of liberal principles, exposing the pragmatic calculations that drive political⁢ action, regardless of stated ideology.