1/16/2001, Boles (office) wrote to WSN: > In that case, when does US military power *begin* to decline? Ten years from now? Twenty? What about what's going on now and in the foreseeable future? Dear M. Boles, I suggest that the scenarios which offer the greatest insight are those involving the U.S. & China, and the U.S. & Germany. There is little chance that U.S. hegemony will decline prior to a military confrontation of China by the U.S. There is much empirical evidence of this, some of which has been posted to this list previously. For this reason, any 'long range' modelling of geopolitical affairs may need to be based on the assumption that the U.S. will achieve a much _higher degree of total global domination before longer-range forces begin to have their effect. With Germany, we have a situation where the U.S. is tacitly encouraging it to expand its military and territorial domain. Germany has more advanced combat technologies than its European neighbors, and its intelligence agencies are on more intimate terms with their American counterparts. The Yugoslavian destablization program has been in essence a joint-venture between Germany and the U.S. The U.S. gets the Caspian oil, and Germany gets an expanded sphere of influence, and the mines (or some similar arrangement). In Huntingtonian terms, Germany is being groomed into its role as 'Core Power' of the 'European Region'. It is being encouraged to build its muscles up to the job of managing regional affairs, but it is not being encouraged to develop a strategic force that could threaten U.S. hegemony. In order to understand how the mid to long range might develop, I suggest we need to examine Huntington's architecture and make a judgement as to its stability over time. I don't think we can deny that the U.S. is using its current hegemony to establish that very regime, nor can we deny that implementation is proceeding by giant steps. Unfortunately, I think the architecture has been worked out rather well, and that it has been designed to last: "Ongoing ideological tension, kept under dynamic hierarchical control via regional core powers - all in the name of Western humanitarianism." This scheme may be to _geopolitical control what corporations have been to _economic control - the ultimate highly-tuned machine. rkm http://cyberjournal.org
Share: