Life and premature death of Pax Obamicana

Asia Times ^ | 24 Dec 2009 | Spengler

[cold start]

History speaks of a Pax Romana, a Pax Britannica, and a Pax Americana - but no other namable eras of sustained peace, for the simple reason cited by Henry Kissinger: nothing maintains peace except hegemony and the balance of power. The balancing act always fails, though, as it did in Europe in 1914, and as it will in Central and South Asia precisely a century later. The result will be suppurating instability in the region during the next two years and a slow but deadly drift toward great-power animosity. Those who wanted an end to US hegemony will get what they wished for. But they won't like it. "No one nation can or should try to dominate another nation," US President Barack Obama told the United Nations on September 23. "No world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will succeed. No balance of power among nations will hold." Having renounced hegemony as well as the balance of power, Obama by year-end chose to prop up the power balance in the region with additional American and allied soldiers in Afghanistan. Obama chose the least popular as well as the least effective alternative. The US president's apparent fecklessness reflects the gravity of the strategic problems in the region. There is one great parallel, but also one great difference, between the Balkans on the eve of World War I and the witch's cauldron comprising Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran and contiguous territory. The failure of the region's most populous state - in that case the Ottoman Empire, in this case Pakistan - makes shambles out of the power balance, leaving the initiative in the hands of irredentist radicals who threaten to tug their sponsors among the great powers along behind them.

[cold start]

Interesting. Please read the full article.

[GAB-1955]

If Obama won't do anything, the lives and property damage that would result from a hundred little Asian wars would be greater than the lives lost in Iraq and Afghanistan to this day. Did I say “if?” I meant “when.”

The mushrooms may sprout over a few Asian cities before this is over.

[Unszane]

sigh, predicting the future based on the past is an old proven way to be right.... It does not leave any room for being creative or visionary though... Why don’t you try to see beyond what has been, and imagine what could be?

[seowulf]

Human nature is what it is and always has been.

That is why predicting the future based on history is effective.

People will always fall for empire. People will always want what their neighbor has and if they’re strong enough will try to take it.

People always want power.

It is human nature no matter how much you visualize world peace.

[bert]

........That is why predicting the future based on history is effective.......

The israelis and the gulf Arabs have agreed to put the Palestinian issue aside and concentrate on Iran. This alliance is the new order that is now warring with Iran.

Surrogates will be cast aside and the battle will be engaged on Iranian soil