What's new

What happens after the American Century?

Kompromat

ADMINISTRATOR
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
40,366
Reaction score
416
Country
Pakistan
Location
Australia
What happens after the American Century?
Friday, 25 July 2014


00660a6e-33d1-4701-8ca5-6176c1a54e91_3x4_142x185.jpg


A decade ago, it seemed like the fate of the world was largely in the hands of just one country - the United States. The American “way of life” was broadcast around the world as the highest achievement of human civilization, with “freedom,” “democracy,” and a defence budget larger than that of all the other industrial countries combined.


There were also “bad guys” who despised that way of life and sought to threaten it. Where previously there were the “Reds” or the “Commies,” we then had the “terrorists” and the “Islamists.”

It was a simple, predictable Hollywood-style script of good versus evil, where the good guys had to win. If the bad guys had some successes against U.S. interests, such as the 9/11 attacks, that was only due to the lack of vigorous pursuit of the virtues of the true American way of life.

Global superhero

What other country could discipline so many of the bad guys at once: fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan, ousting dictators such as Saddam Hussein, and imposing sanctions on countries such as Iran? The United States could fashion itself as a global superhero, and seems to have thought of itself much like those icons of popular culture that it produced. However, like all the empires of the past, it has overreached. The beginning of the joint Sunni-Shiite insurgency in Iraq was the first symptom. The catastrophic financial crisis of 2008-2009 was the official bell.

After the bravado of the presidency of George W Bush, his successor Barack Obama seems to have accepted the new reality with surprising humility and pragmatism. Washington has been scaling down its overseas commitments around the world. It remains the strongest military power in the world, but it is much more aware of its limits.

Though it had originally engaged with some developments during the Arab Spring, particularly in Libya, later crises have drawn muted responses, whether in Syria or Ukraine. The more instability there is around the globe, the more the limits of American power become apparent.

The unavoidable consequence is a global power vacuum, and countries such as China, Russia and even Iran are jumping in to fill the void. Whether in Eastern Europe or the Middle East, this century is not American, not by a long shot.

Geopolitical consequences

Some of the geopolitical consequences are already apparent. Regional powers are busy carving up their own spheres of influence and strategic security zones. Conflict and instability at the margins can only get worse, whether in the Middle East, the former Soviet states or China. Beyond that, however, the consequences for world trade, regional economic development and international political equilibrium are much more difficult to gauge.

What is becoming crucial is how the United States can engage with rising regional powers to maintain some semblance of international order. Its history with them is mixed. Relations have tended to be very warm with the European Union and the Asian Tigers, but have been difficult recently with the BRICS nations (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa).

Things do not look good for the United States. Russia looks set to engage in a new Cold War, Brazil frequently makes its displeasure heard, and even the EU has been severely alienated in the wake of the revelations by Edward Snowden.

However, there are some very promising developments: the election of President Hassan Rowhani in Iran and the real possibility of a detente with Tehran in the wake of the threat posed by the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. If this comes to fruition, and Washington maintains good relations with the Saudis and Turks, we may yet see hope for regional stability in the medium to long term.

_________________________

Dr. Azeem Ibrahim is a Research Professor at the Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College and Lecturer in International Security at the University of Chicago. He completed his PhD from the University of Cambridge and served as an International Security Fellow at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard and a World Fellow at Yale. Over the years he has met and advised numerous world leaders on policy development and was ranked as a Top 100 Global Thinker by the European Social Think Tank in 2010 and a Young Global Leader by the World Economic Forum. He tweets @AzeemIbrahim

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/vie...What-happens-after-the-American-Century-.html
 
.
What's next?

A multi-polar world. :cheers:

America is coming to the realization that they cannot fight all these battles, and more to the point, that they do not want to fight these battles. Why should they risk a nuclear apocalypse for Crimea, does the average American person on the street want to give their lives because of the Crimea referendum? The answer is of course, no.

This is a world full of suffering. I think everyone knows that, even people sitting comfortably in their rich cities will understand this truth.

What we need to do is take care of our own people, raise their living standards, give them better opportunity for education, improve their infrastructure, give them the potential to live good lives. That's what matters, not "political posturing" over regions of the world that most people probably haven't even heard of before, or wars over the same.
 
Last edited:
. .
The world would just go kill itself if it doesnt have America to keep order.

Worlds just too fucked up a place to leave on its own.

The only one to kill himself would be you. A world without America as the cop would be a much better world. We are headed towards a multipolar structure and i say amen to it.
 
.
We'll party like it's 1914.

It doesn't have to be like that though.

Nuclear weapons have changed the game, that's one thing. A global interconnected economy (where countries and economies rely on each other) has changed the game again.

Large powers no longer go to war against other large powers, the costs are just too high. The paradigm has now shifted to insurgency-based conflicts that are often transnational in nature, ignoring national borders.
 
Last edited:
.
It doesn't have to be like that though.

Nuclear weapons have changed the game, that's one thing. A global interconnected economy (where countries and economies rely on each other) has changed the game again.

Large powers no longer go to war against other large powers, the costs are just too high. The paradigm has now shifted to insurgency-based conflicts that are often transnational in nature, ignoring national borders.

and to which the great powers are not immuned to either, which means the terrorist business model is soon going to end.
 
.
It doesn't have to be like that though.

Nuclear weapons have changed the game, that's one thing. A global interconnected economy (where countries and economies rely on each other) has changed the game again.

Large powers no longer go to war against other large powers, the costs are just too high. The paradigm has now shifted to insurgency-based conflicts that are often transnational in nature, ignoring national borders.

I hope you're right, because if you aren't, we're all lost. MAD in the form of the machine gun, accurate artillery, unprecedented naval power, and air power didn't prevent tens of millions of deaths in the pre-atomic age. I am not certain it will continue to work as a deterrent forever, especially now that countries not well known for stability or rationality have or will soon have nuclear weapons.

It wasn't the original causes of WWI and WWII that caused so many deaths, it was the entangling alliances that drew in the whole world which caused the wars to spiral out of control. Who knows what a little spark in the wrong place, at the wrong time will unintentionally precipitate?
 
. .
Well, I suspect that not just after American Century from British Century, it is possible transfer to another unknown white country of new century empire. You know from one cousin to another cousin, we still continue to suffer more.

@Aeronaut @Chinese-Dragon
 
. .
Well, I suspect that not just after American Century from British Century, it is possible transfer to another unknown white country of new century empire. You know from one cousin to another cousin, we still continue to suffer more.

@Aeronaut @Chinese-Dragon

If they (the West) keep sticking together, and the rest of us remain divided and fighting each other, then that's certainly possible.
 
.
Well that may be expected and seems moving in that direction but US is not willing to take the natural course and vowed to use force. While US economy fast loosing its lust, US is determine to use its military to make up for it. It is not mere coincidence that so many conflicts are taking places all over world. In fact in all of these conflicts US is directly involved and instigating. Perhaps, one should consider direct quote from horses mouth, so to speak.

Pentagon looking at possible military options for Russia: US general
Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey says the Pentagon is looking at possible military responses to Russia’s actions in Ukraine.

He said his country is considering military options such as US military “basing, lines of communications, sea lanes” that “we haven’t had to look at for 20 years."

During his address at the Aspen Institute on Thursday night, he warned that Russian President Vladimir Putin “may actually light a fire” he cannot control.

PressTV - Pentagon looking at possible military options for Russia: US general
 
.
Well that may be expected and seems moving in that direction but US is not willing to take the natural course and vowed to use force. While US economy fast loosing its lust, US is determine to use its military to make up for it. It is not mere coincidence that so many conflicts are taking places all over world. In fact in all of these conflicts US is directly involved and instigating. Perhaps, one should consider direct quote from horses mouth, so to speak.

Russia is immune to American pressure. The best they can do is annoy them.

Why? Because Russia can destroy them just as easily as the other way around, and they are far more willing to do it as well.

Why do you think China is testing HGV (hypersonic glide vehicle) technology, same reason.
 
.
What's next?

A multi-polar world. :cheers:

America is coming to the realization that they cannot fight all these battles, and more to the point, that they do not want to fight these battles. Why should they risk a nuclear apocalypse for Crimea, does the average American person on the street want to give their lives because of the Crimea referendum? The answer is of course, no.

This is a world full of suffering. I think everyone knows that, even people sitting comfortably in their rich cities will understand this truth.

What we need to do is take care of our own people, raise their living standards, give them better opportunity for education, improve their infrastructure, give them the potential to live good lives. That's what matters, not "political posturing" over regions of the world that most people probably haven't even heard of before, or wars over the same.

The time has come soon Asia would take back it's rightful place back in the world :yahoo:
 
.
Russia is immune to American pressure. The best they can do is annoy them.

Why? Because Russia can destroy them just as easily as the other way around, and they are far more willing to do it as well.

Why do you think China is testing HGV (hypersonic glide vehicle) technology, same reason.

While Russia can not be threaten with regime change doctrine, Russia is weak in propaganda warfare. That being said, my point was US willing to bet its military muscle as last ditch effort to preserve its "century", while its can no longer afford to do that with economic power.
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom