Sunday, August 23, 2009

Balance of Power: Essential for the Safety of Democracy

Balance of Power is a doctrine that appears to be forgotten and perhaps even repudiated by many in the forward movement toward the disaster called "Globalism." I am no expert on international business or foreign affairs, but it seems to me that we should take a closer look at the "BOP" theory to better ensure the well being of our nation and allies. Those advocates of complete "free trade" in the international business community are perhaps in the forefront leading political theory and practice at this time, and I would suspect the doctrine of "BOP" is anathema to them. Realists on the other hand know damn good and well that the world is a dangerous place and major conflicts and wars have occurred in the last century regardless of economic entanglements. Our enemies and potential adversaries must be contained economically, geographically, and militarily if possible.

There are many levels in the Machiavellian game of ensuring balance of power. Our nation should look to our own interests in this game and ensure that a potential adversary does not; can not; achieve a level of regional supremacy that allows it to escape "regionalism" and become a major player on the world scene. At this time there are nations that threaten the free world and are on a quest for global competitiveness and perhaps dominance. The following are some trouble nations that threaten our country. There is urgent need to keep them contained by military and economic competitors.

The second invasion of Iraq may or may not have been a wise idea on the part of the United States and partners. It is undeniable that Saddam was an evil dictator and was a threat to regional stability. Attacking and occupying Iraq the second time had to have been a tough call. If there were indeed weapons of mass destruction or if the Iraqi government was a sponser of Mohammedan terrorism, then it was probably necessary to destroy the regime. I fear, however that the major long term effect of our military venture will be to strengthen the hand of Iran in the region. In the 80's Iran/Iraq war both nations fought each other to a near stalemate, and while this was horrific, it worked to the advantage of the free nations. The war ensured that neither nation would gain the upper hand in the region and threaten our "allies" in the area thus putting our necessary petroleum at risk. In the First Gulf War, the coalition left the Iraqi regime in power, with just enough of a military to remain a counter to Iran. It does appear that then President Bush had some understanding of the importance of a military balance in the region. The current situation is very different. We are in fact, but not in name, occupiers of Iraq but will not stay for the long term. What will happen is simple for any observant person to predict. We leave and various factions in the country begin a campaign of butchery directed at their political and religious adversaries. Why? Because this is what they do. Iran will then step in and dominate Iraq and thus strengthen her hand in the region. At this time the coalition has become the counter balance to Iran and this fact will tie down troops and naval forces for a long time to come; playing the role that Iraq played under Saddam to some extent. This is physically dangerous to our forces as Iran very well may have the capability to conduct missile strikes on the Western Naval Fleet that is required in the region. It might be argued that it would have been better to leave Iraq alone, but as I noted, it was and is a double edged sword.

China is a potential, no not potential, a factual adversary of the United States and like minded nations. Her march toward economic dominance and military parity is very apparent and is ironically being aided by the international business, globalist community in the United States and other nations. That unfortunately will not change in the foreseeable future and I fear it will be extremely damaging to free nations everywhere. It is imperative that the democratic nations contain this threat before it is too late. Luckily at this time China does not have the military potential, or more accurately, the force projection capabilities, to seriously threaten her ocean seperated neighbors, exclusive of nuclear strike. We should endeavor to keep this a fact. China is historically frightened of Japan and for good reason. Look at the history between the two nations. We should ensure that Japan and China distrust each other and foster our relationship with the Japanese nation to keep this so. The Republic Of China is a thorn in the side of the Peoples Republic and we should ensure that she stay well armed and continue to be a "pebble in the shoe" of China. The Republic of Korea is useful in containing China as well. This is offset to a great extent however by North Korea. North Korea serves a useful purpose to the Chinese by being a proxy military threat to the Republic of Korea, Japan to some extent, and as an annoyance and potential military threat to the United States. More than one can play the "Balance of Power" game.
India, another developing nation that bares watching, also serves a useful purpose as an economic competitor and potential military threat the China. We should foster our relationship with this nation, although realize that her potential to become an adversary is not out of the realm of possibilities. Her naval forces could become a problem in the future. It is hoped that it will be used for containment of the Chinese threat, but that is not a given.
Even the small country of Vietnam serves the purpose of being somewhat of a "pebble in the shoe" of the dangerous Peoples Republic, and as much as it would be unpopular, it is important to foster relations with this small nation.
It is doubtful that Russia, at least at this time, will play a role in containing China. There is historical animosity, but Russia will most likely willingly come under Chinese dominance and become a threat again to Western Democracies and their allies around the globe.
Other nations in the region also look upon China as a potential threat and should be considered as playing a part in keeping the PRC contained.

The nation of Russia has thankfully been neutralized for the most part. She is now surrounded by potential adversaries which are populated by people who hate her. This works to the advantage of the Western and allied nations. Her access to a warm water port is now severely again restricted and it can be seen that she continues to endeavor to have this access with recent overtures toward Syria. If necessary she could forcibly take Ukraine to have further military access to the Black Sea, but would still be confronted by the Turkish nation that may deny her access to another constricted ocean. This is not a bad scenario for the free world to find Russia in at this place and time in history. It is imperative that she not gain access to warm water to again become a major naval power. It is further imperative that she continue to be surrounded by those who hold animosity toward her. This most likely pushes her into a subservient partnership with China, but that is a price that probably must be paid to ensure that she stays relatively weak.

We now come to extreme Mohammedism. This has of course proven to be very dangerous to Christendom and Hinduism and nations so subscribed. It is not however, a culture altering threat. They can and will continue to conduct terrorist operations, but they are no threat to destroying the democratic way of life. They are a dangerous annoyance much like a rattlesnake to the hiker. Keep a sharp watch and crush them before they strike. It can also be argued that extremists can be useful in the containment of our adversaries. They are at this time a cause for concern to both China and Russia, as well as a concern for their "brethren" in Iran. The United States, after all, utilized Muslim extremists to cause severe difficulties for the Soviet Union in Afghanistan with satisfactory results. Unfortunately we are now currently fighting these same Mohammedans.

Balance of Power is unfortunately a real world "solution" to dangers present and future. It is not without some moral issues that again unfortunately, must be overlooked. There is and will be a time when unsavory characters must be supported and if necessary supplied to contain the greater threat. That is a shame from a moral standpoint, but it can be, will be, and is a necessity to defending our nation and like minded states.

1 comment:

John Mellem said...

Very insightful and right on. Thanks for the excellent articles and for following my blog and commenting. I hope the scenario I laid out is not too bad but I wish you the best.