The uninevitable decline of American power

Hot Air linked to an LA Time oped entitled “Twilight of Pax Americana,” wherein the authors tell us that the United States’ economic, political, and military influence is waning:

The international order that emerged after World War II has rightly been termed the Pax Americana; it’s a Washington-led arrangement that has maintained political stability and promoted an open global economic system. Today, however, the Pax Americana is withering, thanks to what the National Intelligence Council in a recent report described as a “global shift in relative wealth and economic power without precedent in modern history” — a shift that has accelerated enormously as a result of the economic crisis of 2007-2009.

They rightly point out that this is not necessarily a good thing, even for people who aren’t fans of the United States:

The result will be profound changes in world politics. Emerging powers will seek to establish spheres of influence, control lines of communication, engage in arms races and compete for control over key natural resources.

Although the weakening of the Pax Americana will not cause international trade and capital flows to come to a grinding halt, in coming years we can expect states to adopt openly competitive economic policies as they are forced to jockey for power and advantage in an increasingly competitive security and economic environment.

The coming era of de-globalization will be defined by rising nationalism and mercantilism, geopolitical instability and great power competition. In other words, having enjoyed a long holiday from history under the Pax Americana, international politics will be headed back to the future.

I don’t find much to disagree with in this article, except for the tone of: “Wow, how did that happen? Guess it’s just the way things worked out!”

As chronicled by many Asian observers and even at this tiny little blog, this situation is a slightly accelerated version of China/SCO’s plan to challenge and eventually supplant the United States’ role as sole superpower. They started on this path back in 2001, and have been gaining momentum every year since.

We’ve had many occasions to turn this situation around, and there’s still time to catch ourselves before the end.But our current policies are accelerating our demise so quickly as to seem deliberate. What was a 7-year eventuality now has a 2-year horizon. And that’s only if we don’t pass all that pending self-destructive legislation.

26 Responses to “The uninevitable decline of American power”

  1. lauraw Says:

    Well, I wouldn’t worry so. The Chinese have a long reputation for wielding power beneficently…

  2. Michael Says:

    Laura makes a good point.

    Plus, you don’t see the Chinese randomly invading countries far away from their borders like we do.

  3. Michael Says:

    I mean, just in recent years — Grenada, Panama, Somalia, Bosnia, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Iraq.

    WTF?

  4. Michael Says:

    What a waste of military power. For far less cost, we could:

    1. Close the border with Mexico.

    2. Conquer Canada, which has energy resources.

    Is this not obvious?

  5. Michael Says:

    I’m not overlooking the fact that Mexico also has energy resources. However, we should not conquer Mexico, because it involves too much overhead.

    By “overhead” I mean, many many poor brown people, and extremely well armed and organized drug cartels.

  6. Michael Says:

    Compared to Mexico, Canada is the obvious acquisition.

    First, it would be payback for the War of 1812, a score we have yet to settle.

    Second, post-conquest we would have the easy task of administering a notoriously polite and docile civilian population.

  7. Michael Says:

    ^
    I say that because I am assuming we will spin-off Quebec to France as soon as possible.

  8. Michael Says:

    If we played our cards right, we could swap Quebec for some good resort properties. The options include:

    * Guadeloupe
    * Réunion
    * French Guiana
    * French Polynesia
    * Martinique
    * Mayotte
    * New Caledonia
    * Saint Barthélemy
    * Saint Martin
    * Saint Pierre and Miquelon
    * Wallis and Futuna

    I definitely think we should insist on French Polynesia, Martinique, and St. Martin, all of which might also serve as useful naval outposts.

  9. Michael Says:

    The islands that we acquire from France should then be immediately made available to Lutheran missionaries, in order to take up some of the slack in their lax French-Pacific-Tropical cultures.

    Am I the only one who is capable of such strategic thinking?

  10. Michael Says:

    *Looks upthread*

    I am now the WickedPinto of Geoff’s blog.

  11. Michael Says:

    Sorry, Geoff.

    (Not really, I just wanted to own the Recent Comments.)

  12. Michael Says:

    One more thought:

    In advance of conquering Canada, sealing the border with Mexico, and swapping Quebec for resort, properties, America would do well to consider a personnel issue.

    That is — who will serve as the Governor-General of Newly Acquired Tropical Islands Populated By Many Exotic Women?

    The answer is obvious. That would be me.

  13. Michael Says:

    It’s only fair to make me Governor-General. It was all my idea to start with.

  14. Michael Says:

    So, that’s what I think about China aspiring to be a a superpower.

    It’s all about me.

    I’m done now.

  15. geoff Says:

    Suppose I ought to start cleaning this up, now.

    Where to start? Where to start?

  16. Michael Says:

    Just nuke the whole mess.

    :)

  17. Joe Says:

    Geoff? Geoff Willis? Is that you? This is Dan Alder speaking!

  18. Anonymous Says:

    Notify me of follow-up comments via email.

  19. Vmaximus Says:

    Time to update your blog Geoff.

    For a small fee I will do it for you.

    Heheh

  20. geoff Says:

    I’m thinking about writing some more here. I don’t think the IB regulars would appreciate being deluged in a bunch of serious posts.

  21. geoff Says:

    …or maybe at NiceDeb’s.

  22. Mr. Matamoros Says:

    Post somewhere, dammit…I do visit NiceDeb from time to time.

  23. Mr. Matamoros Says:

    Oh…I see that you posted very recently at IB. (But about Obama’s 1st State Dinner? Whatever floats your boat, man.)

  24. geoff Says:

    Whoa – this here comment makes 6 in one day. It’s like an active blog or something.

    I’d better write a post.

  25. Mr. Matamoros Says:

    She (Mrs. Obama) does look classy, I must admit…

  26. strainer3 Says:

    I don’t feel that there can be a sustainable economic recovery until our government addresses the basic structural problems in our financial system of too much debt and not enough productive jobs to create savings. So while the stock market can stay irrational in the shorter term, in the long run I believe it will go back to reflecting the fundamentals of our boom and bust economy. And that’s why I continue to feel that for long term investors a better portfolio allocation is in cash and gold. I actually came across this morning a very useful piece on gold and the US dollar as a result of the Federal Reserve’s continued attempts to debase our currency and continue to try to solve a debt crisis with more debt: Gold Price Breaks $1,180 as US Dollar Sinks

    here’s an excerpt: “While the Fed minutes indicate the maintenance of current dovish policy for quite some time, a positive factor for the gold price and gold mining sector, other portions of the minutes suggested that the Federal Reserve may indeed have evidence to begin to withdraw the easy monetary policies used to combat the credit crisis.”

Leave a Reply