For even the greatest of empires, geography is often destiny. You wouldn’t know it in Washington, though. America’s political, national security, and foreign policy elites continue to ignore the basics of geopolitics that have shaped the fate of world empires for the past 500 years. Consequently, they have missed the significance of the rapid global changes in Eurasia that are in the process of undermining the grand strategy for world dominion that Washington has pursued these past seven decades.This is a summary of things I have posted in the past at MNE about geopolitics and geostrategy.
However, I don't like the term "decline." The post is not so much about America's supposed decline as about failure to understand and act on basics of geopolitics and geostrategy that are grounded in geography.
America's geographical situation as an "island" continent is a plus for defense but a minus for dominating world events from the geographical core. Russia and China are well placed for that, being situated at "the geographical pivot of history." With Russia having too much land and too may resources to employ itself and China with too many people and too few resources, their eventual cooperation is ordained by geographically position at the core.
There is no way that the US can permanently dominate them individually or prevent them from combining resources. The only thing possible is a delaying game, and that comes with risks, e.g., the overreach that has ended empires previously. America is already stretching itself in the attempt to project power globally and cover all the bases with bases, for example.
The present strategy of containment and destabilization is creating what Pepe Escobar calls "the Empire of Chaos." That is not a strategy as much as a recipe for disaster.
Moreover, trying to impose liberalism is illiberal. The US is therefore caught in a policy contradiction that is obvious.
Tom Dispatch
Tomgram: Alfred McCoy, Washington's Great Game and Why It's Failing
Alfred W. McCoy | J.R.W. Smail Professor of History, University of Wisconsin-Madison
5 comments:
Alfred McCoy wrote a stunning book about covert US involvement in creating the drug trade in southeast Asia. I recommend it highly, but beware it is a huge and very detailed book.
Tom, I can't see what's wrong with the word "decline". In 1945 the US accounted for half the world's GDP and bestrode the world in a way no other country has in history. It may have been the only true world empire. Of course, that couldn't last.
The word "decline" is context dependant. As a world economic and political power it is in decline. But in terms of intellectual and technological capacity and potential affluence, it is, as it has been for some time, in a class of its own.
Just saying that the post is misleadingly titled. It's about American foreign policy errors rather than American decline.
Perhaps US 'containment' and Chinese 'expansion' will lead to a greater cooperation between Europe and Russia ...??
The policy os the US is hellbent on keeping Europe (read Germany, since Germany controls Europe de fact) and Russia separated. This is the extension of the Anglo policy for centuries. But it's a no brainer than the natural course of events is an economic space between the Atlantic and the Pacific. Initially, Asia will be the manufacturing hub driven by Russian energy and resources. The US may be able to delay it, but this cannot be prevented because of the geography. When that happens, the US is no longer the world's market, which a major source of US economic power now. Meanwhile the US is blowing its geographic opportunity in the Americas. Really, really dumb.
the flip side? (there are always more, constantly emerging, options)
does physical infrastructure always win? or does human infrastructure? (the kind that bestows more force agility; Darwin's higher Adaptive Rate)
granted, the two follow one another, but there is amazing room for optimization
for example:
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Chuck Spinney
Long time readers of the Blaster are familiar with strategic theories of Colonel John Boyd (new readers will find a variety of references to them at this link
http://chuckspinney.blogspot.com/p/compendium-colonel-john-boyds.html ).
see Marine Major PJ Tremblay’s thesis,
Shaping and Adapting: Unblocking the Power of Colonel John Boyd's OODA Loop
http://chuckspinney.blogspot.com.es/2015/04/tremblay-report-unlocking-power-of-john.html
In my opinion, Major Tremblay has made a significant contribution to the growing corpus of analyses and writings aimed at fleshing out and evolving Colonel Boyd’s ideas. Tremblay's thesis was written in partial completion of a masters degree, and I think it provides an excellent and readable introduction to the use of Boyd's OODA Loop as a frame of reference for examining the tactical level of combat. Tremblay goes further, however: he introduces general frame of reference for incorporating Colonel Boyd’s ideas more effectively into the Marine Corps education system, from junior to senior levels and from the tactical to the strategic level of combat.
rge: can "Maneuver" operations graduate out of the military, and into US Policy? It's always been randomly present in business, but never formally taught, only absorbed first hand.
Post a Comment