5 years ago, the Berlin Wall Fell-todays problems roots in the '90s
10-17-2014, 06:35 AM
This November 9 through the 25th will see the 25 year anniversary fo the Fall of the Berlin Wall, and the few years long fall of communism, after some 70 years of co-existence. It closed out the short" 20th century (unless 9/11 did).
Today's problems are the result of an earlier generation s neglect, argues Walter Russell Mead. Today, they define the post Cold War years. This generation squandered an opportunity for greater peace, freedom, and prosperity, he says:
This is a wide-ranging, sweeping essay. But it made me think harder about the many issues today.
Perhaps complimentarily (or not), I came across the architect of the US's own post-Cold War Grand Military Strategy talk from November 2001, revised - Dr Thomas P M Barnett: "Wikistrat's "The World According to Tom Barnett" 2011 brief, Pt 1 (Pentagon's new map)" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDVOP0lEECk
Barnet revisited his themes of that earlier presentation in 2011, the earlier version of his lecture given over 400 times in the Washington, DC area as "The Pentagon's New Map," but first for Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld in November 2001.
This 4 minute introduction lays out our world-historical circumstances since 1990 - the US up to 2011, has deployed troops over 150 times in 21 some years. He does not add (but I will) that the UN Report on Human Security found a record post-World War II decline in the numbers and size and non-combatant impact up until 2005 period.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Security_Report_2005
In other words, US military presence doe not mean exacerbating violence - it can mean the reverse, and it did even at the height of "the Surge" in Iraq.
In 2011, Barnett says the "non-integrating gap" is the realm of violence for the world, about 90%, in contrast to the developed and developing "core" nations. Here is where all the US nation building missions, and UN peacekeeping missions take place, most child rapes and civil wars - almost all are in this oval and equatorial area as well. It will be shrunk in over future decades by mostly peaceful means. But the Big Question is this one: how much more violence will accompany this process?
But the process of further globalization is no longer driven by the US, like during the Cold War. Other actors are driving it. This is not a neo-con fantasy, he emphasizes, these are simply the facts about the world today.
I agree strongly with both views, above. Do you disagree? Please discuss! Is the world set on an optimistic longer-term course? what are the new pitfalls and potholes?
Today's problems are the result of an earlier generation s neglect, argues Walter Russell Mead. Today, they define the post Cold War years. This generation squandered an opportunity for greater peace, freedom, and prosperity, he says:
Quote:Quote:("Who's To Blame for a World In Flames?" http://www.the-american-interest.com/wrm...in-flames/)
The financial crash, the euro crash, and the Rogue Russia syndrome all happened well after 2001, but the seeds of these catastrophes were planted not by George W. Bush or Barack Obama; they were planted by Bill Clinton, Helmut Kohl and Francois Mitterrand and their aides and associates back in the 1990s.
It was back then that the fall of the Soviet Union created one of history’s great opportunities, and it was then that a lost generation of Western leaders threw it away. This isn’t the first time the West has lost a hard-won peace....
This is a wide-ranging, sweeping essay. But it made me think harder about the many issues today.
Perhaps complimentarily (or not), I came across the architect of the US's own post-Cold War Grand Military Strategy talk from November 2001, revised - Dr Thomas P M Barnett: "Wikistrat's "The World According to Tom Barnett" 2011 brief, Pt 1 (Pentagon's new map)" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDVOP0lEECk
Barnet revisited his themes of that earlier presentation in 2011, the earlier version of his lecture given over 400 times in the Washington, DC area as "The Pentagon's New Map," but first for Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld in November 2001.
This 4 minute introduction lays out our world-historical circumstances since 1990 - the US up to 2011, has deployed troops over 150 times in 21 some years. He does not add (but I will) that the UN Report on Human Security found a record post-World War II decline in the numbers and size and non-combatant impact up until 2005 period.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Security_Report_2005
In other words, US military presence doe not mean exacerbating violence - it can mean the reverse, and it did even at the height of "the Surge" in Iraq.
In 2011, Barnett says the "non-integrating gap" is the realm of violence for the world, about 90%, in contrast to the developed and developing "core" nations. Here is where all the US nation building missions, and UN peacekeeping missions take place, most child rapes and civil wars - almost all are in this oval and equatorial area as well. It will be shrunk in over future decades by mostly peaceful means. But the Big Question is this one: how much more violence will accompany this process?
But the process of further globalization is no longer driven by the US, like during the Cold War. Other actors are driving it. This is not a neo-con fantasy, he emphasizes, these are simply the facts about the world today.
I agree strongly with both views, above. Do you disagree? Please discuss! Is the world set on an optimistic longer-term course? what are the new pitfalls and potholes?
“There is no global anthem, no global currency, no certificate of global citizenship. We pledge allegiance to one flag, and that flag is the American flag!” -DJT
