At Le Monde Diplomatique Michael Klare warns about “sleepwalking into a big war”:
Although military thinkers in the West have embraced the big-war approach with particular enthusiasm, this outlook has powerful advocates in Russia and China — actions on both sides tend to reinforce the arguments made by their military thinkers. It is clear that the problem is not East or West, but rather the shared assumption that a full-scale war between the major powers is entirely possible and requires urgent military preparations. Only by repudiating this assumption — by demonstrating how such preparations more often precipitate than discourage the outbreak of conflict — will it be possible to eliminate the risk of unintended escalation and improve the chances for success in overcoming other urgent dangers.
His article fills me with questions but I’ll limit myself to just a few. Can you imagine the U. S. going to war to defend Ukraine from the Russians? Why?
And how can you think of it as “sleepwalking” when Pentagon and Congressional leaders have been fomenting major power war for more than a decade? They’re fools but they’re wide awake fools.
Can you imagine the U. S. going to war to defend Ukraine from the Russians? Why?
Given that one of the Presidential contenders was fomenting rebellion and war between Ukraine and Russia just a few years ago, and that pretty much every leader in the West seems to agree with Garry Kasparov is Worse Than Hitler ™, yes, I can imagine it. The only rational explanations I can give are that our leaders are stupid and/or evil. There’s nothing else that makes sense.
And how can you think of it as “sleepwalking†when Pentagon and Congressional leaders have been fomenting major power war for more than a decade?
Why not call it sleep walking? It’s no more ludicrous than … well, most claims made in the news media about how wonderful [insert Democratic Politicians name here] is, or how awful [insert Republican politicians name here] is, on any topic. Hell, go read the stuff New Real Peer Review publishes every day, and you’ll see that’s less ridiculous than most of what passes for scholarship these days.
“Can you imagine the U. S. going to war to defend Ukraine from the Russians?”
Things don’t always happen linearly or simply. We may not have any intention of going to war with Russia over Ukraine but we could still easily end up in one.
“And how can you think of it as “sleepwalking†when Pentagon and Congressional leaders have been fomenting major power war for more than a decade?”
The Pentagon has the responsibility plan and prepare for the worst case scenarios. They have the responsibility to plan and prepare for stupid wars of choice. I’m not sure the Pentagon is fomenting so much as failing to keep necessary planning secret. The Chinese are doing the same thing and it’s not like it’s any secret they are purposely developing capabilities that are clearly intended to strike at our centers of gravity in any conflict.
Query- Some people are worried about being too aggressive with Russia since they are a nuclear power. I get it. OTOH, a number of those same people ignore what is going on with China, or want to be aggressive with China. Do they not know or care that China also has nukes?
Query 2- Suppose that in the not too far off future, China, maybe Russia too (India in the far future), join us as “superpowers”. It seems obvious to me that so much of what we do just doesn’t work then. Shouldn’t we be working towards that now?
Steve
First, China does not have the nuclear arsenal that Russia does, though it is considerable and I wouldn’t want any of them coming here.
Second, China has other trumps that Russia doesn’t, in that it has a rapidly growing economy, better demographics than Russia (though not at all ideal, and not without some perils), a growing position in the world, etc.
Third, China is getting rather aggressive towards long-time traditional US allies, such as the Philippines. We’re tied down to some sort of response. Ukraine doesn’t meet that standard.
And finally, China is, in essence, challenging the open seas doctrine that the US has supported for centuries now. That is a long-term strategic issue for us. OTOH, Russia is attempting to re-assert its traditional influence in places like Ukraine and Georgia, places where WE have been acting as aggressors towards THEM.
(Fomenting an explicitly anti-Russian revolution in Ukraine can’t be considered anything less than a hostile act, and frankly I think they’d be justified in declaring war against NATO for those actions. That they haven’t is simply a calculation on their part that they can’t win such a battle right now, and that they will attempt to assert themselves in other ways. But if we keep pushing, eventually they’re going to decide that direct action is required. It’s pretty much assured.)
All that said, I’d much prefer diplomatic solutions to problems than a war with a major power, in particular if we’re fighting on their turf. (I’d prefer a neutral field.) So I’d prefer we stop pissing off Russia over what is traditionally their sphere of influence, get out of Europe, and seek diplomatic solutions to our problems with China. Those diplomatic solutions will probably require some flexing of both military and economic muscle, but don’t NEED to come down to a shooting war situation.
Russia and China are already both regional superpowers. Maybe India, too, depending on how you define things.
Russia is a global superpower solely by virtue of its nuclear arsenal which is why it will never give up its nuclear arsenal. It has no warm water ports. Sevastopol is a warm water port (meaning it never freezes over) which explains most of Russia’s actions vis a vis Ukraine over the last two years.
China has a very, very long way to go to become a global superpower. The People’s Liberation Army serves primarily to keep the Chinese people from becoming liberated. To be a global superpower China would need a much greater ability to project power than it presently has. An Atlantic port would be helpful, too.
China’s working age population is declining. That’s the same age cohort that comprises the PLA. I’m skeptical that China will ever become a global military superpower or even wants to.
As Ellipsis noted above freedom of navigation is a fundamental U. S. interest and has been as long as we’ve been a country. If we abandon it, I’m not sure what our interests are. It is a setback to our longterm foreign policy interests that we have not extended our insistence to data.
Geography – We have no allies with a land border with China.