Bush and his cabal of Neo-conservative advisers proclaimed that their nation needed no partners in their drive to push the American agenda. In the event, several states signed on as allies in the ‘war on terror', but apart from Britain, theirs was a token presence. When George Bush proclaimed that either countries were ‘with us or against us', many scrambled to assure Washington that they were on the same side.
We imagined that after the relative stability of a bipolar world with the USSR acting as a check on American power, we had entered a unipolar phase in which a single supreme superpower would be free to dictate to the rest of the world. However, sooner than anybody could have imagined, Washington realized the limits of power.
Although President Obama's conciliatory words are a welcome change from Bush's bellicose rhetoric, they are also a recognition that despite its might, America cannot do it alone. Its post-Second World War partnerships are crucial to its standing in the world. Thus, the present American administration has reached out once again to the UN as well as its regional partners to further its agenda, as well as to face the global threat posed by the Islamic jihad.
Over the years, many analysts have expected the European Union's economic muscle to be translated into diplomatic and military clout. This, they hoped, would balance America's unchallenged supremacy. This has not happened, even though the Union's expansion over the last few years has seen its combined economy overtaking America's. The recently-ratified Lisbon Treaty has finally provided a platform for Europe to fulfill its potential to become a superpower in its own right.
However, the choice of the European president and commissioner for foreign affairs has ensured that the Union will remain largely ineffective on the global scene. The truth is that most members are reluctant to spend more on defence, especially during the current recession. Sending troops abroad is very unpopular domestically, and the sight of coffins returning home from Iraq and Afghanistan makes politicians leery of overseas commitments. A more important reason why the EU cannot attain superpower status is its ageing population. With dwindling numbers of workers supporting pensioners, defence forces cannot be expanded when needed without causing shortages in industry and agriculture. Above all, most young Europeans no longer want to undergo the hardships of military life. A whole generation has grown up amidst unprecedented prosperity, and have little taste for the tough discipline demanded by the armed forces.
Although there has been much talk of an independent European military force, nothing has come of it. With separate commands and weapon systems, to say nothing of languages, coordinating a common defence outside NATO is hard to imagine. This Alliance is dominated by the Americans, much to the annoyance of many Europeans. But as the threat from the east has receded with the collapse of the USSR, there is little stomach to increase defence budgets. Indeed, Britain is barely able to maintain a credible nuclear deterrent in the face of the massive budget cuts it is facing.
Another possible challenge the Americans were expected to face was from Russia. It was assumed that once it had shed its crippling satellite states in Europe and Central Asia, oil-rich Russia would be able to modernize its creaking military machine. However, corruption and mismanagement has sapped much of its newfound wealth. The country remains totally dependent on revenues from oil and gas, and price fluctuations make it very difficult to plan ahead. Despite its veneer of democracy, Russia today remains a backward power whose economy is dominated by venal plutocrats. The country is largely run by corrupt ex-Communist Party bureaucrats, and KGB cold warriors who have dreams of grandeur, but lack the vision to make Russia a superpower again.
China is the most likely contender America faces today. Its economy is projected to overtake that of the United States in the next three decades, and it is steadily modernizing its armed forces. Nevertheless, it is still years behind America in terms of technology. Crucially, its navy remains a largely coastal fleet, unable to project Chinese power to the distant corners of the world, as the Americans can and do.
Nevertheless, the Chinese pose a formidable challenge, given their large, highly productive and disciplined population. Another advantage China enjoys is a stable political system and a strong sense of national pride and identity. This translates into a fierce nationalism, and a desire to become a major player internationally. However, China remains a cautious power. It recognizes its own technological limits, as well as the reality of American power. So while it might test Washington's resolve in the region, it is unlikely to confront the superpower unless driven to it.
The most likely scenario is for China to steadily upgrade its arsenal, and to build regional alliances. An important motive for Beijing to create a blue water navy is to be able to protect its sea-lanes. Currently it imports millions of tons of raw materials to fuel its economy, and has embarked on a major ship-building program to field aircraft carriers and other naval craft capable of sailing to distant ports.
While China's ambitions remain distant, America is discovering that despite its overwhelming power, it is meeting resistance from small and medium powers from Venezuela to Iran. Having watched Washington getting bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan, smaller countries and non-state actors have understood the importance of asymmetrical warfare. Venezuela is using its oil wealth to forge an anti-Yankee alliance in South America, while Iran has defied America over its nuclear program and a range of other issues.
In the Gulf, the Obama administration understands that military action against Iran would unleash uncontrollable forces with unknown results. With its forces in Afghanistan and Iraq vulnerable to Iranian counterattack, Washington is reluctant to embark on this course.
Another factor that limits America's freedom of action as a superpower is its flagging economy. Even before the current recession, America's debt mountain was worrying economists and politicians. But with the bank bail-out and the enormous cost of Obama's health care reforms, there are serious concerns in Washington about the mounting defence budget.
The final and ultimate check on its global ambitions is the will of the American people. While it might be easy to whip them into frenzy and obtain their approval for armed adventures abroad, it is less easy to sustain this support, especially when the body bags start coming home, and the tax burden is increased. As the Afghanistan war shows us, Americans are reluctant to send off their soldiers to distant parts of the world to fight wars without an end.
These realities, more than the rise of other powers, will serve as a check to American power in the short run.
While China's ambitions remain distant, America is discovering that despite its overwhelming power, it is meeting resistance from small and medium powers from Venezuela to Iran. Having watched Washington getting bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan, smaller countries and non-state actors have understood the importance of asymmetrical warfare. Venezuela is using its oil wealth to forge an anti-Yankee alliance in South America, while Iran has defied America over its nuclear program and a range of other issues.
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed