The post below on Iran was perhaps a tad long, so I’ve put together an amateurish graphic to explain the relationships among the players. Standard disclaimers apply – I don’t claim that this is complete, data is hard to find, and circumstances can change quickly. That said, here ’tis (as always, click on the graphic for a better view):
Note that the US is fighting the bottom-tier of the power ladder, which is a ridiculous situation for a superpower. The Russians and Chinese use Iran and Syria as proxies. Iran and Syria use terrorist groups as proxies. And the US fights the proxies of the proxies.
We can’t win this way, regardless of the number of troops we send to Iraq. Arguing about troop deployments is just a waste of time. We’ve got to attack this ladder at every rung, and develop our own proxy networks. Much of that work is likely to be dirty, just as it was in the Cold War, but that’s the world we’re in.
November 16, 2006 at 11:22 pm
Geoff,
We have been fighting proxie wars against the Commies since the 40’s. We just need to realize that is what we are fighting and adjust for it.
Mr Minority
November 16, 2006 at 11:24 pm
We have been fighting proxie wars against the Commies since the 40’s. We just need to realize that is what we are fighting and adjust for it.
Yeah – that’s what I’m trying to say. We need to look past the terrorists, insurgencies, and sectarian violence, and start pushing back at a much higher level. And we need to bring some proxies up to speed.
November 17, 2006 at 3:42 am
And we need to bring some proxies up to speed.
What proxies in the region do we have? Pakistan? Afganistan? Hardly reliable or effectual. I always thought that our effort in Iraq was part of a larger strategy to not only remove one of the worst nest of vipers in the world but then turn it into bastion against Islamofascism. The fact is that Russia and China have far easier access and influence in that region. One of our few trump cards is our massive projection of force, so we used it. Time will tell if it’s a successful one – a lot of people think it won’t.
On the whole, I find it more than a little disheartening that we still have to play these games with Russia. I had hoped that by this time the Russians would have come around to the idea that it would be more in thier own self-interest to align with us. Old enmities die hard eh?
November 17, 2006 at 3:59 am
On the whole, I find it more than a little disheartening that we still have to play these games with Russia.
It kind of snuck up on me – I didn’t think Russia was being particularly helpful, but I hadn’t realized the depths of their involvement with Iran. And I hadn’t realized how chummy China and Russia had become.
In the Cold War, we could always play Russia against China to some extent. This time that’s not happening. And as a team, they have all the technological, natural, and population resources they need to claim superpower status. Unfortunately, they seem to be aware of this and are cooperating well for the first time ever.
I don’t think it’s an exaggeration at all to say we’re entering a 2nd Cold War. And we don’t have the economic and technological advantages we enjoyed in the 1st Cold War. It’s going to be a tough couple of decades…
November 17, 2006 at 7:36 pm
I don’t think it’s an exaggeration at all to say we’re entering a 2nd Cold War.
I must strenuously disagree. We are already in Cold War II, as we are in the midst of World War III. The Cold War is not a possibility nor is it over the horizon: it is where we are here and now. (And I know, through my own means, that certain areas of the US government are following this. That is, this is a priority, although it may not seem that way.)
November 17, 2006 at 10:08 pm
Cold War II
geoff of Uncommon Misconceptions has been doing an excellent job posting on what can be called the Second Cold War: the efforts of Russia and China to check, hinder, diminish, and threaten America’s influence (or, rather, that of capitalism and T…