” So ask yourself, which is better ? ‘ Trapping’ the U.S. military power in a Core-wide rule set that determines when and under what conditions it can be effectively employed (don’t forget we can always pursue pointless interventions on our own)? Or triggering a Core-wide arms race to see which great power can field the most frightening colonial corps ? In the former, America gets the privilege of owning the largest gun, so to speak, but in the latter we’re looking at a number of rivals who are similarly armed “
Armed because they cannot allow chaos and warlords in the Gap to interdict the energy supplies that make the difference between stability and unrest in India and China. Which is why future American security policies will involve New Core states moreso than Old Core NATO and Japan. On Osama bin Laden’s offer of ” civilizational apartheid” which half-tempts the EU, Barnett discerns greater realism and a willingness to back up interests with force in India, China and Russia:
” Since the major New Core powers all border the Islamic world, there are few illusions about ‘containing’ this conflict once begun. The Gap is not some abstraction to these governments but a very intimate sort of operational reality…Like the United states, New Core powers are the most willing to wage war to protect the global economy because they have the most to lose by its collapse.”
Dr. Barnett posits a convergence between China and America, New Core and Old Core because the nonzero sum momentum of globalization pulls in that direction, beacuse interconnectedness means that danger is defined by common interests and because the opportunity costs of disconnection in the Gap are increasingly global. The long-awaited shift from Atlanticism to a Pacific orientation for America will be sealed, in Barnett’s view, by the founding of an “Asian NATO” to ” secure the East” for the Core and rule sets will be increasingly determined in accordance with what New Core states logically require to function in a globalized economy. Rule sets that have spread and evolved along with globalization from America’s original ” source code” that united thirteen disparate colonies on an outlier continent into a whole and ignited fantatstic economic and civilizational growth, unprecedented prosperity and individual liberty.
A vision of a future worth fighting for.
Page 3 of 3 | Previous page
urbanist.typepad.com:
October 11th, 2005 at 12:37 am
But could anything resembling the US or EU federalism really arise in the East Asian context, where one country is so vastly bigger than all of the others? Would such a system have to be massively anti-democratic — even more so than the US constitution is — to make small countries feel safe playing alongside China?
Or do you see China and India as the France and Germany of this new arrangement, the giant potential hostility that the whole thing would be designed to contain?
mark:
October 11th, 2005 at 2:20 am
hi again,
Let me differentiate between myself and Dr. Barnett on China.
Tom sees China along with the U.S. and India as the security anchors of an Asian NATO; he also sees a more liberal, peaceful risen China, economically integrated with the rest of the Core as a pillar of a robust G-20 executive of states to help manage globalization’s expansion into the Gap.
To get to this point, the United States would need to, in Tom’s view, assure China’s ( and India’s) energy flows from the gulf and central Asia, precluding China’s need to engage in military competition for these resources or for dominance of the Pacific region and a inevitable clash with Japan. Secondarily, the U.S. and China need to remove the flashpoints of North Korea and Taiwan from the Sino-American relationship allowing Chinese leaders to risk further integration such as yuan convertibility, easing restrictions on foreign investment etc. etc. Thus moving China toward being a fully normal and eventually democratic state.
For my part:
I agree that an Asian NATO is needed – mostly to clamp down on Sino-Japanese, ROK-Japanese, Sino-Indian, Indo-Pakistani and ROK-DPRK points of conflict.
Secondly, to provide a legitimate security exporter in case of massive disorder in Central asia or SEA. This will also make small countries safer than if China is untethered to any regional organization.
I would like to see China rise peacefully and think we should do what we can to encourage such developments. I’m not as optimistic as Dr. Barnett that the CCP leadership can manage both the regional economic disparities in economic growth within China AND liberalize politically. China’s leadership is factionalized and it is opaque; the temptation for a weaker faction to play a xenophobic nationalist card in a power struggle is ever present.
While I would not be so crudely ruthless on Taiwan as Tom, Taipei cannot be allowed to have the power to unilaterally provoke a Sino-American War even as they are cutting their defense spending.
Locking China in to a security alliance is a way of preventing some really bad outcomes
Anonymous:
October 11th, 2005 at 2:40 am
I really don’t get the idea of an asian NATO. It just doesn’t make sense. At the core of NATO was the defense of western democracy, not just a bunch of countries with a common enemy. The idea of our working with China politically goes against everything we stand for. To those who think that they will become democratic, please explain. There is absolutely nothing stopping them. The are not threatened by anyone and their economy is very strong. The default path of political progression seems to be toward a nationalistic government; which is really what we have now.
As to the point on oil…we have a world wide market. You have the dollars, you get the oil. Nobody is threatening China’s oil supplies and hence they have no need to increase their military.
Barnabus
Eddie:
October 11th, 2005 at 9:06 am
Great review, this really makes the next 30 days of waiting for this book (Amazon is SLOOOOOOWWWW shipping to FPO AP addresses, especially while deployed) doubly painful.
An Asian NATO is a very feasible and attractive option, with or without China’s membership. NATO and Russia cooperate to a point, why couldn’t an Asian NATO do the same with China? Promoting peaceful dialogue and cooperation between India, US, Japan and SE Asian states with China and Russia would be wise and beneficial.
mark:
October 11th, 2005 at 4:28 pm
Hi Barnabus,
Well, an EU much less U.S. federalism in Asia is a bridge too far in my view. I don’t think that’s what Tom has in mind even at the most ambitious.
” Asian NATO” is more a concept for a preexisting international security structure in which to make crisis response decisions – as opposed to countries flying off the handle and playing nuclear brinksmanship over the 38th parallel, the Taiwan Straits or Kashmir. It wouldn’t hurt for cases of earthquakes, tsunamis or governmental collapse either.
The reason for ” Asian NATO” would be that an outbreak of war between regional powers or a regional power and the U.S. is not in American interests. Even if we kept out the economic effects of any war involving China would damage the global economy.
Not having some kind of structure doesn’t mean we won’t have to deal with the resultant mess.
Interad:
October 23rd, 2005 at 11:00 am
Hi, I really like your blog. There is this outstanding website regarding map of korea. You better check it out some time.
Anonymous:
October 25th, 2005 at 9:55 am
Hi – You have a great blog. I have a webpage about self defense supply I’d like you to visit. Here’s the link
Anonymous:
October 25th, 2005 at 10:59 am
Will be back. Great site with some great info. Glad your here.
I have an ebay auctions misspelled auction search site. It pretty much is a search engine that allows you to search eBay for misspelled auctions and allows you to find some great bargains. Come and check it out if you have a chance.
eBay misspelled auctions
Interad:
October 28th, 2005 at 7:03 am
Hello, I am a korean visitor, good to see you.
I am sure that your blog page looks great to me which mean looking crowded so, I would like to let everybodies know korea information official site korea.net same as Dynamic korea – contains all about korea news and informations, please let me introducel this cool site. Dynamic korea offer korea travel, culture, food, arts and government info exactly what you want to knowmarine in korean war. You better check it out some time.
Interad:
October 28th, 2005 at 3:07 pm
Hello, I am a korean visitor, good to see you.
I am sure that your blog page looks great to me which mean looking crowded so, I would like to let everybodies know korea information official site korea.net same as Dynamic korea – contains all about korea news and informations, please let me introducel this cool site. Dynamic korea offer korea travel, culture, food, arts and government info exactly what you want to knowseoul south korea. You better check it out some time.