if we want to get things done, such as re-designing the world economic order, or intervening for peace, we cannot any longer just do them within the cosy Atlantic club; we are going to have to find new allies in places we would never previously have thought of. And they will be less congenial and have demands of their own. The recent global financial crisis has made it very plain. If we want a more ordered world at a time of great instability, we are going to have to provide a space at the top tables for nations that do not share our culture, our history, our world view or even our values. It sounds like his is recommending that Europe turn to the dark side. Not in so many words, but yes, in so many words.
Again, I have been reading the works of Thomas Paine and this paragraph brought to mind the story he tells of the innkeeper and the child. The innkeeper, while unwilling to take up arms to defend himself, family, etc. hopes for “peace in my time.” Paine describes this phrase as unfatherly, even selfish. Paine then goes on to say that a father would have said, “If there is to be trouble, let it be in my time so my children may have peace.”
This whole article is talking about who Europe should get in bed with to ‘keep their peace.’ At no point truly considering the evil and destruction such a stance brings to them. It is like the tories of colonialist America hoping Howe would not destroy them if the just went along to get along.
The author is correct in describing the power struggle the world is going through, but no one right now can predict who will become top dog. The middle-east has been (is) a destabilizing factor around the globe. The author looks to major countries, perhaps he needs to look to what is an emerging “religious” culture and their 57 states. The overthrow will not come from armies or bombs, but from their own failure to meet and deal with trouble in their own time.