US Role in the Coming World Order




 
--
Boots
 
February 18th, 2005  
Peter Pan
 

Topic: US Role in the Coming World Order


There is a great flux in the international order, currently and beyond.

Four issues encompass the same:

1. Globalisation of world economy.
2. Rise of fundamentalism in all religions.
3. Growing insecurity.
4. The security role of the sole global superpower.

Economic growth and globalization will coalesce the world, but unequal competition might produce disorder as will the rapid growth in some countries from the ‘Stone Age’ to the “Rocket Age’. The have-nots may employ means what is called ‘non-state actors’, importantly the terrorists.

The terrorists could be of the semi centralized AQ type or footloose cannons.

Terrorism has not only visited the US but earlier was and is rampant in Asia, fuelled by religious fanatics. Europe and Russia too are not free of this vermin.

Divergent national interests, causative of the end of the Cold War has given rise to the quest to form new alliances of convenience (eg EU Defence and the European cosying up with China). This may negate a common world policy in tackling these elements

These non traditional alliances is diluting the US role in the world order, especially in the global policeman role since the US strategic reach (an essential ingredient in the global superpower status) manifest in the bases of the transatlantic alliance, which is showing signs of being frayed at the edges.

The US dependence on foreign oil supplies also makes it more vulnerable as the competition for secure access grows and the risks of uninterrupted supply increase. Radical politics makes the Middle East a tinderbox.

An Arab Israeli conflict resolution would foster greater affinity of the Arab world towards Europe, which has been favorable to the Arabs over the Israelis. This would further dilute the US pivotal position to maintain her role as the ‘sole global superpower’.

Notwithstanding, Middle East could still embody instability owing to the clash of civilsation and be a fertile ground for the spread of terrorism as also proliferation of WMD since not only Iran has the knowhow, but it is alleged that Saudi Arabia and Syria are also nuclear threshold capable.

Rapid changes are taking place in Asia in the form of surging economies, military and technological advancement. This will increase the competition between them and could lead to conflict in the quest for regional supremacy.

The Korean and Taiwanese issues are rapidly emerging as a challenge to the US hegemony making it a necessity for Japan to play a more leading and important role in the area. This is possible only by changing the Japanese Constitution, which is not readily acceptable to its pacifist population nor to its neighbours, haunted by Japan’s militarist past.

Africa may continue to remain instable. The vast untapped geological resources is ideally lucrative for global players to profit through instability since satraps are more amenable to lures of personal glory and profit than democratic and established govt.

That being the perceived world scenario, it must also be remembered that no country is within the striking distance to overhaul the US in any of the spheres that hallmarks a global superpower, be it military, the strategic reach or economy.

In such a scenario, what would be the role of the US and how should it iron out the global imbalances to bolster her position as the sole global superpower?
February 18th, 2005  
godofthunder9010
 
 
I believe you are vastly overstating the dominance of the USA in the world. Most of that dominance is granted and by a general sense of trust, and could easily be taken away by the world community.

The USA vs the World === the USA loses.

We just don't see that because the USA doesn't do anything blatantly horrible or obviously unjust. Iraq has shaken the faith of the World Community, regardless of whether it was right or wrong.
February 18th, 2005  
Peter Pan
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by godofthunder9010
I believe you are vastly overstating the dominance of the USA in the world. Most of that dominance is granted and by a general sense of trust, and could easily be taken away by the world community.

The USA vs the World === the USA loses.

We just don't see that because the USA doesn't do anything blatantly horrible or obviously unjust. Iraq has shaken the faith of the World Community, regardless of whether it was right or wrong.
That is not the point.

I have just given the situation that is evolving. Now it is for you to contribute to the thread and not attack the messenger.

Unlike you (if I got it right), I don't think that the world has moved away from the US. It is just that the large majority do not see the same way as the US only in Iraq. Even that should change, if things work out.

And this is not an anti US thread. The first post just gives the situation in the world and asks what is to be done to maintain a credible superpower status in this slowly emerging conflict areas. That is all.
--
Boots
February 18th, 2005  
godofthunder9010
 
 
My point was, the USA is already weaker and less influential. As the world situation evolves, it is a pretty safe bet that the USA's power and influence will continue to slowly diminish. The USA's role as the sole superpower cannot last for long, IMHO.

Much of what you are putting forward is difficult to respond to because much of it makes assumptions about what direction the world is going. If history teaches us anything at all, it certainly teaches us that the unexpected or bizarre can happen at the most unexpected times, from unexpected sources.

Some unforseeable sequence of events may happen that will guarantee that the USA will be the most powerful nation on the planet for the next 1000 years. Something similar might happen that will guarantee Superpower status to Indonesia.

So if things keep going the way they are going?

China will probably do something drastic somewhere and touch off a massive bloody conflict in Southeast Asia. Probably either over Taiwan or Japan or both. What happens next there is anybody's guess and far too messy to try to predict.

The Middle East will continue to be a hotbed for growing fundamentalist groups. The nations of that region will continue to remain unstable and under-developed. Feuds and rivalries between the nations, tribes and ethnic groups of that region will continue to cripple them from achieving any true power. Oil will keep the rest of the world deeply involved until there isn't anymore left.

India and Pakistan will continue their bitter relations and border skirmishes. It very likely will escalate to something very very terrible ... eventually.

Russia will bottom out and begin to recover and rebuilt itself, as will the other nations that were previously part of the USSR. As a coalition of nations, their power will increase steadily, but will probably never come close to equalling their former status and power.

About 1/4 of the population of Africa will die of AIDS. Africa will remain unstable indefinitely, except for a handful of countries.

Latin America will remain unstable.

Nobody will immigrate to Antartica.
February 18th, 2005  
Peter Pan
 
Thank you.

I apologise. I misunderstood your post.

Fine, lets take the easy things first.

Let's look at Europe.

1. What is to be done to bring Europe back to being one entity and focussed as it was before.

2. What is to be done to Russia so that it does not feel that the West is attempting to encircle her as also diminishing the natural leadership of Russia over the erstwhile Soviet states?

3. How can the European economy be brought to work in tandem with the US economic goals?

Quote:
Nobody will immigrate to Antartica.


For the sake of discussion lets take the time specturm tto be till 2020 in all cases of Post No 1.
February 18th, 2005  
Doppleganger
 
 
There is one thing you have missed, which is the effect of the possible muslimification of Western Europe. This could have a fundamental effect on the policies of one of the most influential and richest areas of the planet.

http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1056046/posts

The above link is interesting and alarmist, but I'm not sure whether things will exactly come to pass as it postulates. I would like to state that the above link does not reflect my own opinion, but it's quite revealing nonetheless.
February 18th, 2005  
Missileer
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Pan
Thank you.

I apologise. I misunderstood your post.

Fine, lets take the easy things first.

Let's look at Europe.

1. What is to be done to bring Europe back to being one entity and focussed as it was before.

2. What is to be done to Russia so that it does not feel that the West is attempting to encircle her as also diminishing the natural leadership of Russia over the erstwhile Soviet states?

3. How can the European economy be brought to work in tandem with the US economic goals?

Quote:
Nobody will immigrate to Antartica.


For the sake of discussion lets take the time specturm tto be till 2020 in all cases of Post No 1.
What time period are you asking about in no. 1? The only time I've known
of Europe being focused was when it was at war with a common enemy.

As for no. 2, Russia refuses to meet anyone half way on anything. Glasnost was the last communications breakthrough concerning the West. I think paranoia is a national trait.

No. 3, could you elaborate on what you mean by US economic goals as they relate to Europe?
February 19th, 2005  
Dark Ventrue
 
Quote:
1. What is to be done to bring Europe back to being one entity and focussed as it was before.
First of all EU needs to stop arguing. they must get one currency and all nations in the EU must except the EU constitution that has been drawn up.

Quote:
2. What is to be done to Russia so that it does not feel that the West is attempting to encircle her as also diminishing the natural leadership of Russia over the erstwhile Soviet states?
Give the space to manoeuver and perhaps the world should stop interfering in Russian internal affairs.

Code:
3. How can the European economy be brought to work in tandem with the US economic goals?
Good question. Even if the US and European countries are friends they are very different in leadership, culture you name it.
Perhaps something simple would help. They produce what we needs we buy or vice versa.
February 19th, 2005  
godofthunder9010
 
 
Quote:
3. How can the European economy be brought to work in tandem with the US economic goals?
They are already heavily interlinked. The USA and Europe and their respective economies are extremely interrelated. Are we exploring how to increase this interdependence?
February 19th, 2005  
Sexybeast
 
it is more like a multi-super power world in the future, rather than U.S is the king of the world