The stunning defeat of the Republicans in the U.S. Congressional elections two weeks ago has prompted a much needed rethink about the global strategy of the American Empire.
Nearly four years after the invasion of the country by the “coalition of the willing”, Iraq is sinking into civil war. The American occupiers have been reduced to the level of spectators as sectarian violence drives Iraq toward balkanization. Political elders have been called in to seek a graceful way out of Iraq for the Bush administration. Disillusioned with the war and the broader vision of the administration, American voters punished the Republicans when they handed control of both houses of Congress to the Democrats.
More than the Bush administration is in crisis. The American global position is threatened. The U.S. military is overstretched. Iran appears to be the major winner as a consequence of the Iraq debacle, more likely than ever to develop nuclear weapons, and to become a more decisive regional player. North Korea defied the will of the international system with its nuclear test in the autumn of 2006. Washington relies ever more on China, its ultimate global rival, to rein in the regime in Pyongyang.
The financial position of the United States in the global system grows over more imperiled, in need of a major correction. Americans owe more than two trillion dollars more to foreigners than is owed by foreigners to them. More than a trillion dollars in U.S. securities are held by the Chinese and the Japanese. The position of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency is in doubt.
Pulling back from the details, what snaps into focus is the fact that the American Empire is in crisis. The United States faces problems remarkably similar in kind to those experienced by previous empires.
With the presidency of George W. Bush in tatters, the unilateralist experiment undertaken by the neo-conservative leadership of the United States since the terror attacks of September 11, 2001 has been repudiated by the American people. The warrior ethnic promulgated by the authors of the invasion of Iraq----Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and others---has landed the United States in a quagmire in some ways more difficult than that of Vietnam. Since 1945, it has been a feature of every American administration to maintain domination over the critical region of the Persian Gulf with its vast petroleum reserves. Losing in Vietnam was humiliating for the United States and led to deep national soul-searching and self-doubt. Losing in Iraq means that American power in a more critical region of the world has been irretrievably checked.
Over the next two years, leading up to the presidential elections of 2008, we will be witness to a fundamental debate, not about whether the American Empire should continue to exist, but about how its strategic position in the world can be salvaged in the aftermath of the Iraq catastrophe.
Nearly four years after the invasion of the country by the “coalition of the willing”, Iraq is sinking into civil war. The American occupiers have been reduced to the level of spectators as sectarian violence drives Iraq toward balkanization. Political elders have been called in to seek a graceful way out of Iraq for the Bush administration. Disillusioned with the war and the broader vision of the administration, American voters punished the Republicans when they handed control of both houses of Congress to the Democrats.
More than the Bush administration is in crisis. The American global position is threatened. The U.S. military is overstretched. Iran appears to be the major winner as a consequence of the Iraq debacle, more likely than ever to develop nuclear weapons, and to become a more decisive regional player. North Korea defied the will of the international system with its nuclear test in the autumn of 2006. Washington relies ever more on China, its ultimate global rival, to rein in the regime in Pyongyang.
The financial position of the United States in the global system grows over more imperiled, in need of a major correction. Americans owe more than two trillion dollars more to foreigners than is owed by foreigners to them. More than a trillion dollars in U.S. securities are held by the Chinese and the Japanese. The position of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency is in doubt.
Pulling back from the details, what snaps into focus is the fact that the American Empire is in crisis. The United States faces problems remarkably similar in kind to those experienced by previous empires.
With the presidency of George W. Bush in tatters, the unilateralist experiment undertaken by the neo-conservative leadership of the United States since the terror attacks of September 11, 2001 has been repudiated by the American people. The warrior ethnic promulgated by the authors of the invasion of Iraq----Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and others---has landed the United States in a quagmire in some ways more difficult than that of Vietnam. Since 1945, it has been a feature of every American administration to maintain domination over the critical region of the Persian Gulf with its vast petroleum reserves. Losing in Vietnam was humiliating for the United States and led to deep national soul-searching and self-doubt. Losing in Iraq means that American power in a more critical region of the world has been irretrievably checked.
Over the next two years, leading up to the presidential elections of 2008, we will be witness to a fundamental debate, not about whether the American Empire should continue to exist, but about how its strategic position in the world can be salvaged in the aftermath of the Iraq catastrophe.
1 comment:
MK Bhadrakumar always has penetrating insights into central asia. He argues that US Russsian relations will deteriorate.
His previous discussions of the NATO infiltration of the CIS is very poignant.
An excerpted version of his latest,
( US – Russian Relations After Democrat Election Win ) can be found here:
http://bracewell.livejournal.com/283978.html
Post a Comment