The Death of a Superpower?

[SvenSvensonov]

IMHO Sven's view may represent more of American mindset in a traditional or conservative way. "Me and friends" plus quick shooting at the bad guys was the spirits of cowboys and sherrifs to bring justice or lawful orders in the wild west of America. These spirits or principles of US strength have worked well for US and allies up to the fall of the Soviet Union. It won't work well anymore.

US military power is unprecedentedly strong, even stronger than that of China and Russia combined. Friends or allies really don't add any weight to the US military strength that was already demonstrated in Korean War 65 years ago. In Asia, US allies are considered as "pawns" or protectorates of US “monster” that are dependent on US interests and politics. These countries are US allies only when they serve to the US interests to cope with the "challenger" or “potential challengers”.

I don't want to spend to much time on this, but I will say several things as counterpoints:

1. The US friends model is still very, very effective, especially during times of war. I see the Korean War be thrown around every so often on PDF as a way to try and prove(?) a point. The military lessons of 65 years ago are not relevant today.Warfare has changed too much. Perhaps we can look back and say that human wave attacks are foolish and ineffective, but can achieve limited military aims. Look at the First Gulf War, Bosnia or Kosovo for a more modern view on how alliances help project power. It was a coalition, and not the US, that saw the Iraqi Army collapse into a heap of slag; a coalition that's voluntarily helping to stabilize Afghanistan (and under the Taliban it was anything but stable)

Also as for US allies being considered pawns... that's a singular viewpoint, often expressed by those outside of the alliances as a way to discredit those within one, while those within the alliance are there voluntarily and often as a result of external factors that threaten them. The same is said about Russia's ECO initiative as an attempt by it to revive its glory days under the Soviet Union, not an attempt to build stronger economic ties. North Korea and China have the same referenced about them. It's natural to say such things about that which you are not privy too. Recently, the Philippines asked the US to return to its soil, and this shows the value of allies... they help you project power where your's was limited.

Without friends you are very, very limited in your ability to weather problems. Russia can't stave off the sanctions imposed upon it by Europe and the US because it doesn't have anyone will to step up, hold its hand and help it through its tough times. Kazakhstan, Armenia, Syria, none have the economic clout needed to help and the Chinese are smart businessmen, they will help only if they see a good business opportunity. They will not help for the sake of friendship.

As another example, its a lack of real friends, allies if you will, that sees Russia and China limited in their geopolitical capabilities (even if neither nation has aspirations of global dominance). Russia can't leave their neighborhood and China is very restricted by its neighbors. Forget military actions, neither nation has allies that they can call upon to support a war in a far off land... often these nations don't even have political friends to support them in a push for sanctions, alliance building, actions in the US or anywhere else. What China has is strong business ties, but as I've already pointed out, these don't make a friendship as nations can keep their trade and political ties separate. For examples see the USSR and US, China and Japan as a result of their 2012 island spat, South and North Korea, the US and Venezuela... so on an so forth. The lust for money doesn't often translate in strong political relations with another nation.

2. As for the mindset of the US people, I can't speak for everyone, but I would suggest the US population is more defeatist then it is stuck in the age of the American West, ever willing to resort to bombing anything that discredits or demeans us. The US citizen is the one who most often expresses their thoughts and views and the inevitability of the downfall of the US - followed by the Russian citizen. We're so defeatist that anytime our nation goes into a collective "funk" our economy falters as a result of the decline in consumer sentiment. It's been us in the US that foretell our inevitable falling to Chinese influence, I only wanted to counter some of those sentiments by showing the we, the US, still have considerable say in global affairs, even if we cede influence in some areas or our relative strength is muted as others rise.

I hope no one thought I was expressing a desire to suppress others through force, I hardly find such actions conducive to global stability. Rather, I was addressing the strengths of the US on a global scale, and we are still able to influence events. There was no "Shoot Quick" in my article, the US is very, very patient and adaptable, it has a strong history of not using violence, but diplomacy instead... as I expressed in the body of the OP. If needed we can orchestrate a revolution, fight a war or sanction you into obscurity, but there are more tools in the toolkit of the US then that. I didn't address how I think the US should respond (so one can hardly claim my thoughts to be the traditional(?) views of US international power), just offered my thoughts on what the US can do.

3. As for allied nations helping the US cope with or challenge a challenger, South Korea and Japan, Bulgaria, and Turkey all maintain strong ties with nation the US considers geopolitical rivals, they are also very strong "pawns" of the US. The do help us cope, often though its to foster stronger relations, we push Japan toward finding peace with China, not conflict. The actions of other nations lead to their own containment and suppression, just look at the situation befalling Russia and the response it drew from the US and other nations (we certainly had a hand in Europe's response), but not every nation that is friendly or allied with the US went along with our sanctions. Japan's were paltry and South Korea didn't do anything at all. Even in Europe there was descent. Being a friend doesn't mean you sell your national sovereignty to a greater power. Nations, as they ever have, continue to pursue their own paths, though we can influence or radically shift them if needed.

Also @LeveragedBuyout is very correct in his saying that Cold War 2.0 is the situation we find ourselves in at the moment, though I would offer that we never truly left the first one, we just added a few more concerns to our existing ones.

What I wrote doesn't represent my views on how the US should be or act, just how the US can or the tools it has to influence global events... and we have more tools then any other nation. I don't tend to express my thoughts on internet forums or anywhere for that matter, I keep them to myself, as seen in my general reluctance to engage in political discussions... or prolonged discussions about any topic.

Also @Chinese-Dragon - how often are Chinese population censuses released? I was trying to find more up-to-date information on Chinese fertility and population growth for @LeveragedBuyout but I could only find information from 2012.

2010 seems to be that last time a population census was conducted, at least according the outdated information presented in these articles.

Fertility rate, total (births per woman) | Data | Table

Baby Boom or Economy Bust: Stern Warnings About China’s Falling Fertility Rate - China Real Time Report - WSJ

 

[Zabaniyah]

Russia's currency is taking a nosedive.

Holy-cow

 

[Sanchez]

I don't want to spend to much time on this, but I will say several things as counterpoints:

1. The US friends model is still very, very effective, especially during times of war. I see the Korean War be thrown around every so often as a way to try and prove(?) a point. The military lessons of 65 years ago are not relevant today.Warfare has changed too much. Perhaps we can look back and say that human wave attacks are foolish and ineffective, but can achieve limited military aims. Look at the First Gulf War, Bosnia or Kosovo for a more modern view on how alliances help project power. It was a coalition, and not the US, that saw the Iraqi Army collapse into a heap of slag; a coalition that's voluntarily helping to stabilize Afghanistan (and under the Taliban it was anything but stable) Also for US allies being considered pawns... that's a singular viewpoint, often expressed by those outside of the alliances as a way to discredit those within one, while those within the alliance are there voluntarily and often as a result of external factors that threaten them. Recently, the Philippines asked the US to return to its soil, and this shows the value of allies... they help you project power where your's was limited.

Without friends you are very, very limited in your ability to weather problems. Russia can't stave off the sanctions imposed upon it by Europe and the US because it doesn't have anyone will to step up, hold its hand and help it through its tough times.

As another example, its a lack of real friends, allies if you will, that sees Russia and China limited in their geopolitical capabilities (even if neither nation has aspirations of global dominance). Russia can't leave their neighborhood and China is very restricted by its neighbors. Forget military actions, neither nation has allies that they can call upon to support a war in a far off land... often these nations don't even have political friends to support them in a push for sanctions, alliance building, actions in the US or anything else. What China has is strong business ties, but as I've already pointed out, these don't make a friendship as nations can keep their trade and political ties separate. For examples see the USSR and US, China and Japan as a result of their 2012 island spat, South and North Korea, the US and Venezuela... so on an so forth. The lust for money doesn't often translate in strong political relations with another nation.

2. As for the mindset of the US people, I can't speak for everyone, but I would suggest the US population is more defeatist then it is warmongering or stuck in the age of the American West. The US citizen is the one who most often expresses their thoughts and views and the inevitability of the downfall of the US. We're so defeatist that anytime our nation goes into a collective "funk" our economy falters as a result of the decline in consumer sentiment. It's been us in the US that foretell our inevitable falling to Chinese influence, I only wanted to counter some of those sentiments by showing the we, the US, still have considerable say in global affairs, even if we cede influence in some areas or our relative strength us muted as others rise.

I hope no one thought I was expressing a desire to suppress others through force, I hardly find such actions conducive to global stability. Rather, I was addressing the strengths of the US on a global scale, and we are still able to influence events. There was no "Shoot Quick" in my article, the US is very, very patient and adaptable, it has a strong history of not using violence, but diplomacy instead... as I expressed in the body of the OP. If needed we can orchestrate a revolution, fight a war or sanction you into obscurity, but there are more tools in the toolkit of the US then that. I didn't address how I think the US should respond (so one can hardly claim my thoughts to be the traditional(?) views of US international power), just offered my thoughts on what the US can do.

3. As for allied nations helping the US cope with or challenge a challenger, South Korea and Japan, Bulgaria, and Turkey all maintain strong ties with nation the US considers geopolitical rivals, they are also very strong "pawns" of the US. The do help us cope, often though its to foster stronger relations, we push Japan toward find peace with China, not conflict. The actions of other nations lead to their own containment and suppression, just look at the situation befalling Russia and the response it drew from the US and other nations (we certainly had a hand in Europe's response), but not every nation that is friendly or allied with the US went along with our sanctions. Japan's were paltry and South Korea didn't do anything at all. Even in Europe there was descent. Being a friend doesn't mean you sell your national sovereignty to a greater power. Nations, as they ever have, continue to pursue their own paths, though we can influence or radically shift them if needed.

Also @LeveragedBuyout is very correct in his saying that Cold War 2.0 is the situation we find ourselves in at the moment, though I would offer that we never truly left the first one, we just added a few more concerns to our existing ones.

What I wrote doesn't represent my views on how the US should be or act, just how the US can or the tools it has to influence global events... and we have more tools then any other nation. I don't tend to express my thought on internet forums, I keep them to myself, as seen in my general reluctance to engage in political discussions... or prolonged discussions about any topic for that matter.

Also @Chinese-Dragon - how often are Chinese population censuses released? I was trying to find more up-to-date information on Chinese fertility and population growth for @LeveragedBuyout but I could only find information from 2012.

2010 seems to be that last time a population census was conducted, at least according the outdated information presented in these articles.

Fertility rate, total (births per woman) | Data | Table

Baby Boom or Economy Bust: Stern Warnings About China’s Falling Fertility Rate - China Real Time Report - WSJ

Your counter points do not add better explaination to your original analysis. About the definition of allies and friends they are either politically or militarily. In Europe US has only UK that can be called a true ally. In East or Southeast Asia US has no true ally but protectorates or friendly countries that rely on promises of US military protection. If you don't believe it you could search on internet to find anti-US sentiment in East Asia including Japan, Koreas, Taiwan and Philippines...I don't think that US will have any friends if you break your promise on military protection.

As to the definition of "pawns" the political moves of sovereign countries controlled by US share one thing in common , i.e., that they are dependent on the US militarily. This could apply to all your allies in East Asia.

China does have many friends that share also one thing in common, i.e., that they are troubled in one way or the other and need help but ignored by international community. A Chinese travelling around the world is a lot safer and more friendly treated in middle east, africa, major asian countries. Chinese prefer to have people to people friendship. Inevitably, world governments will want to be friends with us as China gets stronger in military might. We could set up military bases in a number of countries if we want.

Russians could also have global military presence if they get enough money.

At 2008 Beijing Olympics China presented a single character "和", sending our message to the world. The character is the essence of Chinese philosophy of life and society: harmony. It consists of two symbols, mouth and food. A harmony world or society is, in Chinese view, that everybody has food. The character represents Chinese view on a fair world or way of coexistence. It's not like "Me and Friends" plus quick shooting (The allies and military capability) doctrine that Americans believe in to make a better world.

 

[Ruisheng]

Your counter points do not add better explaination to your original analysis. About the definition of allies and friends they are either politically or militarily. In Europe US has only UK that can be called a true ally. In East or Southeast Asia US has no true ally but protectorates or friendly countries that rely on promises of US military protection. If you don't believe it you could search on internet to find anti-US sentiment in East Asia including Japan, Koreas, Taiwan and Philippines...I don't think that US will have any friends if you break your promise on military protection.

As to the definition of "pawns" the political moves of sovereign countries controlled by US share one thing in common , i.e., that they are dependent on the US militarily. This could apply to all your allies in East Asia.

China does have many friends that share also one thing in common, i.e., that they are troubled in one way or the other and need help but ignored by international community. A Chinese travelling around the world is a lot safer and more friendly treated in middle east, africa, major asian countries. Chinese prefer to have people to people friendship. Inevitably, world governments will want to be friends with us as China gets stronger in military might.

At 2008 Beijing Olympics China presented a single character "和", sending our message to the world. The character is the essence of Chinese philosophy of life and society: harmony. It consists of two symbols, mouth and food. A harmony world or society is, in Chinese view, that everybody has food. The character represents Chinese view on a fair world or way of coexistence. It's not like "Me and Friends" plus quick shooting (The allies and military capability) doctrine that Americans believe in to make a better world.

They mustn't agree with you with their military might-based philosophy. They don't know what is diplomacy. All they need to know is the location of their aircraft carrier and the number of missiles available.

 

[Mahmoud_EGY]

I

Without friends you are very, very limited in your ability to weather problems. Russia can't stave off the sanctions imposed upon it by Europe and the US because it doesn't have anyone will to step up, hold its hand and help it through its tough times. Kazakhstan, Armenia, Syria, none have the economic clout needed to help and the Chinese are smart businessmen, they will help only if they see a good business opportunity. They will not help for the sake of friendship.

i agree but to china it is not about economy and profit alone the main powers in the world today are US western europe china russia it is not wise for china to let the west make russia surrender because then they will be all alone facing them also russian technology in weapons is needed after all china is a young super power with still much to learn

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Also @Chinese-Dragon - how often are Chinese population censuses released? I was trying to find more up-to-date information on Chinese fertility and population growth for @LeveragedBuyout but I could only find information from 2012.

2010 seems to be that last time a population census was conducted, at least according the outdated information presented in these articles.

Fertility rate, total (births per woman) | Data | Table

Baby Boom or Economy Bust: Stern Warnings About China’s Falling Fertility Rate - China Real Time Report - WSJ

I don't think the data has been released yet.

But with the One child policy gone, no doubt those 2050 predictions are a bit off track.

And who knows, the Chinese government may even provide incentives to have more children in the future.

Regardless, we will always have a working age population in the hundreds of millions, all we need to do is educate them and allow them to be productive. Even a country like Britain with a working age population of only around 20 million can produce a yearly output of trillions.

Education is what will fuel our economic growth.