Imperial Overstretch

Guest Post by Patrick J. Buchanan

Imperial Overstretch

Toward the end of the presidency of George H.W. Bush, America stood alone at the top of the world — the sole superpower.

After five weeks of “shock and awe” and 100 hours of combat, Saddam’s army had fled Kuwait back up the road to Basra and Bagdad.

Our Cold War adversary was breaking apart into 15 countries. The Berlin Wall had fallen. Germany was reunited. The captive nations of Central and Eastern Europe were breaking free.

Bush I had mended fences with Beijing after the 1989 massacre in Tiananmen Square. Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin were friends.

The president declared the coming of a “new world order.” And neocons were chattering about a new “unipolar world” and the “benevolent global hegemony” of the United States.

Consider now the world our next president will inherit.

North Korea, now a nuclear power ruled by a 30-something megalomaniac, is fitting ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads.

China has emerged as the great power in Asia, entered claims to all seas around her, and is building naval and air forces to bring an end to a U.S. dominance of the western Pacific dating to 1945.

Vladimir Putin is modernizing Russian missiles, sending ships and planes into NATO waters and air space, and supporting secessionists in Eastern Ukraine.

The great work of Nixon and Reagan — to split China from Russia in the “Heartland” of Halford Mackinder’s “World Island,” then to make partners of both — has been undone. China and Russia are closer to each other and more antagonistic toward us than at any time since the Cold War.

Terrorists from al-Qaida and its offspring and the Islamic Front run wild in Libya, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Nigeria and Somalia. Egypt is ruled by a dictatorship that came to power in a military coup.

Japan is moving to rearm to meet the menace of North Korea and China, while NAT0 is but a shadow of its former self. Only four of 28 member nations now invest 2 percent of their GDP in defense.

With the exception of the Soviet Union, some geostrategists contend, no nation, not defeated in war, has ever suffered so rapid a decline in relative power as the United States.

What are the causes of American decline?

Hubris, ideology, bellicosity and stupidity all played parts.

Toward Russia, which had lost an empire and seen its territory cut by a third and its population cut in half, we exhibited imperial contempt, shoving NATO right up into Moscow’s face and engineering “color-coded” revolutions in nations that had been part of the Soviet Union and its near-abroad.

Blowback came in the form of an ex-KGB chief who rose to power promising to restore the national greatness of Mother Russia, protect Russians wherever they were, and stand up to the arrogant Americans.

Our folly with China was in deluding ourselves into believing that by throwing open U.S. markets to goods made in China, we would create a partner in prosperity. What we got, after $4 billion in trade deficits with Beijing, was a gutted U.S. manufacturing base and a nationalistic rival eager to pay back the West for past humiliations.

China wants this to be the Chinese Century, not the Second American Century. Is that too difficult to understand?

But it was in the Middle East that the most costly blunders were committed. Believing liberal democracy to be the wave of the future, that all peoples, given the chance, would embrace it, we invaded Iraq, occupied Afghanistan and overthrew the dictator of Libya.

So doing, we unleashed the demons of Islamic fanaticism, tribalism, and a Sunni-Shiite sectarian war now raging from North Africa to the Near East.

Yet though America’s relative economic and military power today is not what it was in 1992, our commitments are greater.

We are now obligated to defend Eastern Europe and the Baltic republics against a resurgent Russia, South Korea against the North, Japan and the Philippines against a surging China. We bomb jihadists daily in Iraq and Syria, support a Saudi air war in Yemen, and sustain Kabul with 10,000 U.S. troops in its war with the Taliban. Our special forces are all over the Middle East and Africa.

And if the neocons get back into power in 2017, U.S. arms will start flowing to Kiev, that war will explode, and the Tomahawks and B-2s will be on the way to Iran.

Since 1992, the U.S. has been swamped with Third World immigrants, here legally and illegally, many of whom have moved onto welfare rolls. Our national debt has grown larger than our GDP. And we have run $11 trillion in trade deficits since Bush I went home to Kennebunkport.

Thousands of U.S. soldiers have died, tens of thousands have been wounded, trillions of dollars have been expended in these interventions and wars.

Our present commitments are unsustainable. Retrenchment is an imperative.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
13 Comments
robert h siddell jr
robert h siddell jr
June 9, 2015 10:06 am

Pat is right and none of the adverse results were just accidental; Hussein is the prophesied Black Mahdi (ref “AntiChrist Obama? Islamic World Lauds Obama as the Mahdi”) who has filled the White House & Executive Branch with Muslim advisers-czars who are fostering WWlll and preparing the way for The Mahdi who will defeat the infidels. In the mean time, Hussein is filling the USA with illegal Muslims and the SCOTUS repeatedly rules against Christians and for Atheist and Muslims (ref Albert Pike WWlll Prophecy). He is right that throwing out the Commie Rats and electing facist RINOs will not stop the tyrannical march of the NWO Illuminati (what good did it do the Senate?); somehow Patriotic Americans have to take America back from the Bankster Elite and Leftist welfare class or we speed up along the road to Hell. .

Persnickety
Persnickety
June 9, 2015 10:10 am

“no nation, not defeated in war, has ever suffered so rapid a decline in relative power as the United States.”

So we “won” in Iraq and Afghanistan?

No, we didn’t. We invaded each one without clear and achievable goals. Some politicians seemed to think that we would transform them into civilized, freedom-loving western democracies. Which is sheer lunacy. We have not done so, nor is it likely that anyone could have done so (short of exterminating the existing populations and resettling some adventurous westerners – which may sound radical but is basically the blueprint of the 18th and 19th centuries).

We lost both Iraq and Afghanistan, defeated not by any specific foreign army, but by our own stupidity. And we spent incredible sums on both wars, sums which are lost forever.

I agree that our imperial power is waning, but one major reason is easy to see if we are honest.

dc.sunsets
dc.sunsets
June 9, 2015 12:53 pm

The vast sums of money spent on Foreign Military Adventures were a feature, not a bug.

The US military is simply a conduit for wealth to flow to American and mulitnational corporations fastened to Uncle Sam’s (pentagon) Right Tit.

The failed Wars on Poverty and Drugs are a conduit for wealth to flow the American and multinational corporations (and the vast government bureaucracies with legions of employees) prosecuting them.

Victory is NOT A GOAL, it never was.

Only children still believe that the purpose of political government has one iota to do with national, cultural or social benefit.

The state is a criminal organization exercising a legal monopoly for crime over a defined territory. The USA is the apogee of this, given that it exercises a near-monopoly on organized crime over almost the entire planet.

Crime is a lousy way to organize a society, which is why we see toxicity everywhere we look. We get the “government” to which our neighbors consent, and our entire society now believes in theft-as-a-public-good.

Persnickety
Persnickety
June 9, 2015 1:24 pm

@dc, I agree with your statement “Only children still believe that the purpose of political government has one iota to do with national, cultural or social benefit.” to the extent of the current federal government, some state governments, and the national governments of some other countries (e.g., the UK).

I think it is possible to have a decent government that is not so thoroughly corrupt however. We got here from the worship of greed, the lack of any real national culture, and our imperial focus of the last several decades (it arguably started in the 19th century but took off c. 1941). Some degree of corruption is probably inherent in all governments, but I think the amount of corruption is vastly less in certain countries (Norway, Switzerland, Austria, Iceland) and certain states (North Dakota (at least pre-Bakken)… and… ummm… possibly others). To look for less corruption you need to look for a place where there is a single, relatively uniform and cohesive culture – which usually means a single ethnicity and religion – and that culture has values and traditions other than just greed and the seeking of power. This is why some homogeneous mideast countries are nonetheless very corrupt (Saudi Arabia, looking at you).

There is a way to correct this – though not easily. Downsize units of government until you can reach the homogenous level, and avoid any imperial tendencies. This won’t happen quickly or smoothly, of course.

Iska Waran
Iska Waran
June 9, 2015 2:05 pm

Seem apropos:

In Germany, Bush to call for more support for Ukraine

dc.sunsets
dc.sunsets
June 9, 2015 2:18 pm

No political system can survive anonymity.

When any political system rises above the point where Joe Blow can walk up to the highest official on the street and ask him or her what the HELL they think they’re doing when then (fill in the blank), tyranny is the destination.

This means that political systems above the level of a small town are toxic, always must be. People are not angels, and political power always attracts the worst of us. Only when such people are kept close and their work kept open and visible can they be trusted not to stab us all in the back.

NickelthroweR
NickelthroweR
June 9, 2015 2:31 pm

Greetings,

I think this system could be undone but it would require a shift in wealth and power. The monarchs of Europe had a good run until power and wealth moved from ownership of land to the merchant class. After all, the clock makers guild could just as easily raise an army as the local royalty – perhaps even easier as royalty had land but the merchants had coin.

What is the base of power for our current criminal system? Is it their printing press? Is it the ownership of media? Is it their military? All of the above?

That we have the internet as well and sites like this erode their monopoly on information. Strike One! What we must do is work towards making these sociopaths as irrelevant as the King of France. Remember him?

Persnickety
Persnickety
June 9, 2015 3:06 pm

@dc: I am reminded of the famous “Not yours to give” speech by Davy Crockett. One copy is here:

http://www.constitution.org/cons/crockett.htm

I agree on the principle of responsiveness and lack of anonymity. Based on Crockett’s speech it appears to me that early in the Republic there was still responsiveness at the federal level. Of course the country’s population was much smaller then, and responsiveness would have been limited to free male citizens (and therefore nearly all white) with at least some property, not to every last person.

There is something called the “principle of subsidiarity”, frequently associated with the Catholic Church, that asserts that nothing should be done on a more centralized and remote basis than it absolutely has to be. Some reading:

http://www.acton.org/pub/religion-liberty/volume-6-number-4/principle-subsidiarity

I find it greatly ironic that the Catholic Church supposedly includes this as doctrine given their far-flung empire, but regardless of the supporters, I think it is an interesting and somewhat worthy concept.

Russia Is Strong
Russia Is Strong
June 9, 2015 3:39 pm

If the neocons get back into power in 2017, U.S. arms may start flowing to Kiev but kiss this planet DASVEEDANYA because Russian nuclear warheads will start flowing right BACK!

yahsure
yahsure
June 9, 2015 6:22 pm

The Russians and the Chinese could make some other form of money the” standard” Backed by Gold. The U.S. Would be destroyed. No more printing and we collapse. No shots fired.
I just hate all these corrupt war hawk fuks.Like John McCain, I think they have a chair in Hell with his name engraved on it,Waiting for him.

llpoh
llpoh
June 9, 2015 8:28 pm

Thought this was going to be about Obammy pulling a muscle doing yoga. Carry on.

EL Coyote
EL Coyote
June 9, 2015 9:35 pm

But it was in the Middle East that the most costly blunders were committed. Believing liberal democracy to be the wave of the future, that all peoples, given the chance, would embrace it, we invaded Iraq, occupied Afghanistan and overthrew the dictator of Libya.

Historical revisionism at its finest. Damn, when Nixon is mentioned in the same breath with Reagan, the shit is getting deep. No way we invaded Iraq to secure oil for America. No way we shipped American jobs to China to pay pennies per hour. No way we wanted to expand and use NATO as an extension of US might. It is so hard to understand how we fell from grace so soon after reaching the top, if only Poppy Bush had been re-elected, America might still be the world’s lone superpower.

EL Coyote
EL Coyote
June 9, 2015 9:36 pm