The American Empire

intellectual conservative ^ | 12/12/03 | Alan Caruba

[expatpat]

I don't believe it will last very long -- the US public (esp. the liberal and female segments) is way too wimpy to do the hard, harsh things necessary to keep an empire.

[1st-P-In-The-Pod]

Interesting. BTTT

[marktwain]

I don't believe it will last very long -- the US public (esp. the liberal and female segments) is way too wimpy to do the hard, harsh things necessary to

I am not so sure about that. This isn't an empire in the Roman sense. Most of the "Harsh and Hard" things will be small scale, and can be done pretty quickly. Remember, too, that it will be our policy to allow local government and to improve the lot of the people in our empire.

This will be a loose fitting, leave us alone, and we won't come down on you, kind of arrangement.

[expatpat]

Most of the "Harsh and Hard" things will be small scale, and can be done pretty quickly.

If you believe that, I have a nice bridge to sell you.

it will be our policy to allow local government and to improve the lot of the people in our empire.

The Brits did just that -- and they had to do a lot of hard harsh things, even so.

This will be a loose fitting, leave us alone, and we won't come down on you, kind of arrangement.

Here, you prove my point. That kind of wishy-washy approach will not keep an empire very long at all.

[Filibuster_60]

Here, you prove my point. That kind of wishy-washy approach will not keep an empire very long at all.

Exactly. The world can't be conquered with a carrot-and-stick approach if we want to maintain our national sovereignty. Simply offering carrots means that the more cunning actors in the global system will grab the opportunity to weave a web of interdependence with which to undermine US independence.

An empire is a double-edged sword. However much we try to maintain our sovereignty, at the present rate it appears destined to wither under the unrelenting assault of transnational corporate and financial power. IMO we'll still be the strongest nation on earth in 2050, but the nation-state as an institution will be well on its way to obsolescence.

[Billthedrill]

Great find.

That aspect of Bush's trip to Baghdad hadn't occurred to me, frankly. We sort of take for granted that he can fly anywhere he wants, anytime - for that matter, we figure we can as well. In fact, it is something that is historically somewhat anomalous, and it is, after all, a bad old world out there.

"Empire" is perhaps the best of a number of not-quite-applicable terms ("hegemon" being another in current vogue) that describes what is going on in the short term only. It is actually gratifying to see that persons in the U.S. government, which sometimes isn't noted for its farsightedness, take a view as long as this one evidently is. If I am not mistaken it is for at least a century - Chinese terms, for a change. And it is simply this - during this period of unprecedented ascension, we have the opportunity to set up portions of the world that might otherwise constitute a counter-empire in time, with governmental systems that are inherently less threatening, looking forward to the inevitable waning of our own power and the ascension of the next, whoever it might be. Stable representative governments in such places are not merely altruistic exercises in idealism, they are concrete steps taken to assure our own future safety and security.

This is thought on a grand scale, but it isn't, despite my remark above, unprecedented in American history - the Louisiana Purchase, Manifest Destiny, Seward's Folly, the Marshall Plan, and Kennan's Long Telegram are all examples of a time when real policies were crafted that looked forward to something more than the next presidential election. So too, I think, with this sudden flurry of activity in an entirely new geopolitical direction - if Pearl Harbor brought us Marshall and Kennan, then it seems to me likely that 9/11 is bringing us a similar paradigm shift, and none too soon.

Naturally it won't go as visualized - such grand scale planning rarely does. But what, of it, remains through temporary setbacks and the advent of unsympathetic administrations will dictate the shape of the world our children's children will live in. "Interesting times" isn't always a curse.

[lainde]

bttt

[Zeroisanumber]

I am not at all intereste4d in creating, paying for, policing, or otherwise maintaining an empire. I would vastly prefer collective security arrangements made between the US and other close allies such as the UK, Australia, Germany, Japan, and so forth.

[delapaz]

You may not be interested in an empire. But I'll bet you are very interested in keeping Nuclear weapons out of the hands of hostile nations. Like it or not, the way we accomplish this will smell a lot like an empire.

[expatpat]

The best approach might be to keep away from all foreign entanglements, unless attacked -- then we beat the sh*t out of them.

[Dallas59]

Who made the American "empire"? It seems to me that alot of people want to join.

[DarthMaulrulesok]

(joking mode on)
American empire?
You mean, we have to:
Wear Togas?
Learn Latin again?
Build another interstate (international?) highway system making sure all roads lead to Washington?
Feed dissidents to lions?
Make criminals fight each other to the death for public amusement?
Burn cities to the ground, kill the men, sell the women and children and plow the ground with salt?

Sounds jolly. When do we start? (joking mode off)

Seriously, though. This talk about empire is a delusion. We have at best, until 2010 to win the war on terrorism. After that, redistricting due to our increasing Hispanic population will make the Democratic party a permanent majority. Hillary or someone like her will win in 2012 and the long march towards socialism will continue.

Also, our aging population will demand tax increaes to keep social security and medicare from collapsing. That will squeeze out money for defense.

Of course, if there is another 9/11 type attack, all bets are off.

[Agkistrodon]

In 1980, the Soviet Empire looked to be poised to rule the world- It had stalemated the forces of Freedom in Korea, defeated them in Cuba, China, Vietnam, and Afghanistan,in short every where we had engaged them by force; and controlled a world wide movement of loyal workers as a fifth column in every nation on the planet. And Breshnev could travel just about any where he wanted. Ten years later it was gone forever.
News flash everybody: THE AMERICAN EMPIRE IS ALREADY AS DEAD AS THE SOVIET EMPIRE. We are currently running 500 Billion dollar deficits to maintain our current grossly overextended activities, and the Boomers haven't even started to retire yet. The Federal Government has mandated open ended expenditures to the States, thus insuring their inevitable bankrupting as well, and King George the Socialist has created an entirely new class of entitlements which in the long run is demographically impossible to pay for. God know what he plans for a second term encore.
Fiscal collapse is coming to this Former Republic and no force on Earth can stop it. So much for the American Empire.

[Billthedrill]

Tell me the part about the dissidents and the lions again... ;-)

I don't honestly think that the demographic changes in the United States (even if they do project linearly from today, and I doubt they will) will halt this process; if anything they will exacerbate it. Young, rich (by comparison) America will be in combat with young, poor Middle East, and the outcome is not much in doubt. In any case if we're not done by 2010 I'll be very much surprised. WWII only took six years and we only played for four of them, and the sides aren't anywhere near as even now as they were in 1941.

But your point is well taken, and is not necessarily contradictory to my own view - we need to ensure that stable, representative governments are set up by the time that such demographic changes as you propose, if they do happen, will weaken our ability to project our force to the degree necessary. If you are correct about 2010, then we need to be finished with this process by then.

[185JHP]

We are the most benevolent empire in the known history of the world. We usually err on the side of "too soft."

[endthematrix]

Couldn't have said it any better than that. Very cornice and to the point. Most don't realize when a President's grandiose plan that follows through a rival party's administration, it is usually carried out faithfully and honestly. Expansion of NATO, world economic integration, strategic arms reduction are some that transcend party affiliations and can't be cut short without losing face in the eyes of the world. I dont advocate most of it. Just telling it like it is....

[nopardons]

Listen you troll newbie, what you lack in knowledge, you make up in hyperbole and sound exacatly like Howard Dean. Go back to DU, before you get ZOTTED royally here. :-)

[endthematrix]

"We have at best, until 2010 to win the war on terrorism...Of course, if there is another 9/11 type attack, all bets are off."

This is the thinking of the people I talk with. The rationale is that if the terrorists can kill Americans in small numbers at a time the better. Eventually however, a public demands to remove forces from Iraq and Afghanistan once a magic number of dead results, say 3,000 plus one.
That is of course as you say is another large scale attack on US occurs and all bets are off. Basically, the US will turn into a monster war machine. Almost definitely turning authoritarian.
The US need to stay the course, win and keep Iraq on our side strike our adversaries in every corner for 100 years, then we might the WORLD safe for the next 1000 years.

[DarthMaulrulesok]

(kidding mode on)
Maybe we could get rid of a few troublemakeing peace activists "Life of Brian" style? You know:

SCENE: various people being crucified by Romans.

Man: "Wait, wait, I don't want to be crucified with them."

Woman: "I don't want to be crucified with him."

(General hubbub): "I don't want to be crucified with them, I have a right to be crucified only with my own kind" etc.

Centurion: "All right, we'll sort it out! Now, everyone who objects to being crucified here, raise your hands."

(Brian and others try to move their hands but they are already tied/nailed up. "Uggh, arrgh, grunt, groan"

Centurion: (smiles) "Right, then." (leaves)

OK, OK, bad taste, sorry. (joking mode off)

My concern, getting serious, is that we are in the opening rounds of what could be another 30 years war. As I see it, we may not have that much time. Now, assuming no more 9/11's for a moment (as I said above, if there IS another such attack, all bets are off and I would think/hope we would be committed to do whatever had to be done however long it will take)

Barring that for a moment, if we have only till, let's say, 2012 (about 8 years from now) how are we going to:

1. Defeat the terror-sponsoring states (Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia for sure, maybe later Pakistan, others)

2. Create among these (conquered) states some semblance of democracy. (And before I go any further, no I don't know how to teach the populations of those countries to have respect for private property, individual rights, government based on the consent of the governed, and 100 other factors that make our democratic republic what it is. Nor do I know where we might find another dozen or so Kemal Attaturks.)

3. Destroy the existing terror network.

4. Destroy the support structure (Mosques, charities, politcal organizations, religious schools) which fund, provide recruits for and encourage terrorism.

5. Create an Islamic reformation so the passages in the Koran which call for global Jihad are reintrepeted or otherwise effectively repealed.

6. Prevent other states from turning into terror states.

We might be able to convince the majority of Muslims that terror is not a good idea for them without doing all of the above, but how to do even that without being bloody-minded I don't know.

I hate to sound so pessimistic (honestly, I do) but it looks like we have 3 choices, all of them bad:

1. Give up (I assume that is a non starter for all of us)
2. Keep trying to do what we are doing now, and hope by the time 2012 rolls around we have made enough progress to create a consensus to keep going.
3. Drastically accelerate our operations by placing the country on a WWII type war footing. And using Attila type tactics. We could win quickly, but at what cost to our souls!