Opinions | Columnists
Americans question their hegemony
Each day, Washington produces dozens of reports, many of which go unread. Most contain useful analyses though few advertise the decline of American hegemony.
- By Joseph A. Kechichian, Special to Gulf News
- Published: 00:02 November 27, 2008
Each day, Washington produces dozens of reports, many of which go unread. Most contain useful analyses though few advertise the decline of American hegemony.
It was, therefore, something of a surprise when the National Intelligence Council (NIC), the federal body empowered to harness the collective intelligence capabilities of thousands of researchers, released its Quadrennial "Global Trends" report advancing such an argument.
Astonishingly, the NIC predicted that while the US would remain the most powerful military country in 2025, emerging powers would significantly weaken its superpower status. Is this a valid proposition?
The 120-page report, accessible online, covers many topics and devotes a good deal of attention to economic concerns. In a globalised environment, it anticipates the rise of narrow "State Capitalism," which means that the current bumpy ride may well bruise many more than presently foreseen. The authors forecast multiple financial crises that will challenge laissez-faire preferences with dire consequences. Depressing in tone, the sad prophecies will add pressure on middle classes everywhere, whose members will see their "way of life" dramatically altered.
The report identifies the emergence of new players - especially Brazil, India and China - and offers four scenarios that anticipate "A World Without the West" or, at least, with a significantly weakened one.
Astoundingly, it confirms that the Al Qaida appeal for terrorism will wane, allegedly because extremists skirted core Muslim concerns, including poverty, unemployment and education. It nevertheless predicts that other violent extremists will have access to increasingly lethal technology, including biological weapons, some of which may actually be used.
Fears of the nuclear doom notwithstanding, there is some good news here, because Arab and Muslim states are no longer perceived through the terrorist prism. NIC proctors kindly declare that among the factors that anticipate such an outcome is Al Qaida's lack of a compelling vision that sensible Muslims might favour.
Even if the onus is on so-called moderates to behave, perhaps by further isolating extremists in their midst, the report implies that the perpetual war on terrorism is neither entirely effective nor possible to sustain.
Nuclear proliferation
The bad news, and there is always some of that, is NIC's assessment of nuclear proliferation that, while remaining "very low," would rise in the next two decades as technology spreads. In the Middle East, we are told that Iran might acquire weapons, which may spark a regional arms race, although the carefully vetted account predicts the latter's rise, along with non-Arab Muslim Turkey and Indonesia, as central players.
Whatever risks these non-Western actors represent are marginal, however, because the report worries about a "hobbled giant," the European Union, which will be crippled by internal bickering and a Euro-sceptic citizenry. Few will deny that several European countries face significant challenges to integrate immigrants, particularly those from Muslim backgrounds, though this should not be exaggerated.
The supposition that less than two decades from now, Washington will only be "first among equals," is also overstated even if nation-states will undoubtedly fight over resources. In fact, should future conflicts be over scarce possessions, it will be difficult to tell the difference between rogue states, terrorist groups with access to nuclear weapons, and self-appointed but accepted hegemons. Who will trust international organisations and welcome arbitration or dialogues among the masses?
Under the circumstances, with chaos a likely outcome in 2025, should anyone be surprised when Washington makes the case that it is necessary to lead after all. According to the NIC, "leadership will be key" to any future endeavours, even if it does not say whose leadership it prefers.
Chances are excellent that it is American leadership NIC recommends. Therefore, the challenge for the developing world is to hone skills to limit whatever damage angry and unstable superpowers inflict on resource-rich entities, in the name of leadership. Pre-emptive wars, perhaps the ugliest aspect of the Bush Doctrine, will be routinised in the future although such control seldom protects aggressors.
Leadership theme
Of course, the leadership theme is not new, with none other than Henry Kissinger, still America's premier strategist, chiming in. Kissinger recently opined: "although America will be less powerful, it is still the essential nation in creating a new world order," and while "it will not retain the position of self-proclaimed tutor," everyone must understand which power is "indispensable". In other words, consult emerging powers and engage in dialogues, but let it be clear why there is utility in a superpower acting as judge, jury, and executioner.
Naturally, many will vociferously object, but Western decision-makers understand what this means. It is for this reason that chaos is a valuable option because it is only under such a scenario, where an unstable multi-polar world dictates behaviour, that the indispensable nation-state plays a critical role.
Arms races, territorial expansions and military rivalries all translate into new businesses that necessitate a full redrawing of the checkerboard. The question is, which countries will be able or ready to be equal interlocutors to challenge the United States in 2025?
Dr Joseph A. Kechichian is a commentator and author of several books on Gulf affairs.
Share this article
Popular in Opinions
-
Opinions
Speak Your Mind: Cyberbullying
How can we protect our children from being Cyber bullied?
Opinion Editor's choice
-
Mosque razing ruling exposes India polity
It would be tragic if those who demolished the Babri Masjid went scot-free
-
All eyes on Obama
Failure to outline an effective strategy at West Point could cost the US president not only victory in Afghanistan, but the White House itself
-
A year after 173 defenceless people were killed
Mumbai itself is far from safe from another deadly attack, even though the level of security consciousness of the average Mumbaikar has been raised since 26/11
