America and the Constant Search for War
Published in As-Safir
(Lebanon) on 02 March 2012
by Sameer At-Taneez (link to original)
In order to take a look at the new U.S. defensive strategy that President Barack Obama announced at the beginning of January, it is necessary for us to first take a quick look at a similar strategy used during the Cold War and after, when the U.S. seized the throne of unipolarity.
Thirty-five years ago, Russia and China were great powers that threatened and caused wars involving the U.S. and played a great role in arming guerrilla warfare. They supported national liberation movements in various parts of the world while blocking American proposals at the United Nations Security Council. However, since the Soviet collapse, these two countries have remained in a gray area, neither in support nor in opposition of the U.S., although though they have collaborated with the U.S. in some instances.
At the time of the Cold War, the United States defense budget was the largest in the world. While Russia had 35 intercontinental missiles, the U.S. owned 850 missiles. It should also be mentioned that the U.S. had control of energy supplies, especially in the kingdoms and emirates of the Persian Gulf that were under direct American protection. These gulf countries used to purchase American weapons as well as place their money in American banks while accepting every American imposition. This relationship has continued, and we believe that it will continue until the Persian Gulf runs out of oil.
The Iraq War, the Afghanistan War, the Israeli war on Lebanon in the summer of 2006 and the aggression towards Gaza in the beginning of 2009 have all contributed to the alteration of military strategies throughout the world. More specifically, the Iraq War has caused political chaos that has led to the rise of ethnic and sectarian divisions in Iraq. This is of course in addition to the complete destruction of the Iraqi state that contributed to the forced migration of 2 million Iraqis to neighboring countries. The other surprise was in the south of Lebanon, where Hezbollah resilience led to its victory, despite the superiority of Israeli weaponry.
Strategic experts say that America faces dangers from Islamic jihad, which resorts to the use of suicide bombers in martyrdom operations. However, the greatest danger for Americans lies in the weapons of mass destruction that they hold. Despite the formation of a broad front of hostile nations and another broad front of allies, Islamic jihad continues in small areas and regions, such as in multi-ethnic groups like the Pashtun tribes in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Taliban movement can also be considered a local movement that does not seek establishment throughout the world, unlike al-Qaida.
U.S. experts consider Iran a rogue state that constitutes a threat, despite the fact that the U.S. economy is 68 times greater than that of Iran and the U.S. Army budget is 110 times greater than Iran’s defense budget. As for Iran’s attainment of an atomic bomb, there is no doubt that it will lead to a very complex geopolitical situation in the Middle East, tipping all balances and equations.
Barack Obama declared at the beginning of this year the adoption of a new military strategy, which reflects the U.S.’ strategic developments in the 21st century, that included facing the East Asian threat as a result of the imminent rise of China. This strategy also called for the reduction of the fiscal deficit by reducing military spending by $487 billion in the coming decade.
This also means that the U.S. government will desist from long-term ground troops in the style of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, though U.S. presence will still be heavy in East Asia and NATO cooperation is expected to continue. Nevertheless, America will certainly remain vigilant in the Middle East, especially in addressing Iran. This strategy of troop reduction and abandonment of old policies was also prevalent during the Cold War, which included the reduction of a nuclear arsenal and armored divisions that were prepared to fight the Soviet Union in the plains of Europe. This new strategy also calls for the reduction of the approximately 80,000 U.S. troops stationed in Europe on missions such as intelligence-gathering and counterterrorism, and in response to the presence of WMDs and electronic confrontation, the use of drones, bombers, offensive aircrafts and the development of special operations forces.
Under the new plan, the number of U.S. troops will be reduced from 570,000 to 490,000 throughout the next decade. This, we would like to point out, is all after the loss of both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, which included catastrophic losses of human lives and resources. Therefore, the U.S. will no longer entangle itself with ground wars and will instead work on strengthening its air forces, as well as its alliances with other nations.
America has also decided to refrain from waging two wars at the same time and will only fight one ground war at a time. This will allow it to maintain its ability to defeat its enemy and prevent others from achieving their goals by forcing them to pay an unreasonable price.
Despite the reduction in the military budget, the new plan shows Washington is determined to maintain its qualitative and technical superiority. Spending on the production of fighter aircrafts will be reduced as the focus shifts towards unmanned aircrafts. Of course, 11 aircraft carriers will be maintained to retain the ability to deploy troops to any part of the globe in order to compete with China.
Because Asia and the Pacific region is now viewed as a potential future center for the 21st century global economy, the new American strategy addresses it as its primary focus. While instability plagues the Middle East, China’s military modernization is progressing at quite a rapid rate. Yet the Arab Spring has begun to reshape the region in an unprecedented way, even though Israel, the main pillar of Washington’s strategy, remains more trapped and isolated than ever before.
Through this new strategy, the Obama administration is trying to pursue a defensive plan that balances the U.S.’ new focus on ‘Asia and the Pacific’ with its continued pursuit of stability in the Middle East, a region where American interests are believed to be threatened. Obama’s opponents, especially the neo-conservatives, were quick to criticize the new strategy and consider it a military retreat that will encourage America’s enemies, especially Iran, to take advantage of the situation. Nevertheless, heavy U.S. military presence will remain in the Persian Gulf in order to protect the oil treasure.
Thirty-five years ago, Russia and China were great powers that threatened and caused wars involving the U.S. and played a great role in arming guerrilla warfare. They supported national liberation movements in various parts of the world while blocking American proposals at the United Nations Security Council. However, since the Soviet collapse, these two countries have remained in a gray area, neither in support nor in opposition of the U.S., although though they have collaborated with the U.S. in some instances.
At the time of the Cold War, the United States defense budget was the largest in the world. While Russia had 35 intercontinental missiles, the U.S. owned 850 missiles. It should also be mentioned that the U.S. had control of energy supplies, especially in the kingdoms and emirates of the Persian Gulf that were under direct American protection. These gulf countries used to purchase American weapons as well as place their money in American banks while accepting every American imposition. This relationship has continued, and we believe that it will continue until the Persian Gulf runs out of oil.
The Iraq War, the Afghanistan War, the Israeli war on Lebanon in the summer of 2006 and the aggression towards Gaza in the beginning of 2009 have all contributed to the alteration of military strategies throughout the world. More specifically, the Iraq War has caused political chaos that has led to the rise of ethnic and sectarian divisions in Iraq. This is of course in addition to the complete destruction of the Iraqi state that contributed to the forced migration of 2 million Iraqis to neighboring countries. The other surprise was in the south of Lebanon, where Hezbollah resilience led to its victory, despite the superiority of Israeli weaponry.
Strategic experts say that America faces dangers from Islamic jihad, which resorts to the use of suicide bombers in martyrdom operations. However, the greatest danger for Americans lies in the weapons of mass destruction that they hold. Despite the formation of a broad front of hostile nations and another broad front of allies, Islamic jihad continues in small areas and regions, such as in multi-ethnic groups like the Pashtun tribes in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Taliban movement can also be considered a local movement that does not seek establishment throughout the world, unlike al-Qaida.
U.S. experts consider Iran a rogue state that constitutes a threat, despite the fact that the U.S. economy is 68 times greater than that of Iran and the U.S. Army budget is 110 times greater than Iran’s defense budget. As for Iran’s attainment of an atomic bomb, there is no doubt that it will lead to a very complex geopolitical situation in the Middle East, tipping all balances and equations.
Barack Obama declared at the beginning of this year the adoption of a new military strategy, which reflects the U.S.’ strategic developments in the 21st century, that included facing the East Asian threat as a result of the imminent rise of China. This strategy also called for the reduction of the fiscal deficit by reducing military spending by $487 billion in the coming decade.
This also means that the U.S. government will desist from long-term ground troops in the style of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, though U.S. presence will still be heavy in East Asia and NATO cooperation is expected to continue. Nevertheless, America will certainly remain vigilant in the Middle East, especially in addressing Iran. This strategy of troop reduction and abandonment of old policies was also prevalent during the Cold War, which included the reduction of a nuclear arsenal and armored divisions that were prepared to fight the Soviet Union in the plains of Europe. This new strategy also calls for the reduction of the approximately 80,000 U.S. troops stationed in Europe on missions such as intelligence-gathering and counterterrorism, and in response to the presence of WMDs and electronic confrontation, the use of drones, bombers, offensive aircrafts and the development of special operations forces.
Under the new plan, the number of U.S. troops will be reduced from 570,000 to 490,000 throughout the next decade. This, we would like to point out, is all after the loss of both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, which included catastrophic losses of human lives and resources. Therefore, the U.S. will no longer entangle itself with ground wars and will instead work on strengthening its air forces, as well as its alliances with other nations.
America has also decided to refrain from waging two wars at the same time and will only fight one ground war at a time. This will allow it to maintain its ability to defeat its enemy and prevent others from achieving their goals by forcing them to pay an unreasonable price.
Despite the reduction in the military budget, the new plan shows Washington is determined to maintain its qualitative and technical superiority. Spending on the production of fighter aircrafts will be reduced as the focus shifts towards unmanned aircrafts. Of course, 11 aircraft carriers will be maintained to retain the ability to deploy troops to any part of the globe in order to compete with China.
Because Asia and the Pacific region is now viewed as a potential future center for the 21st century global economy, the new American strategy addresses it as its primary focus. While instability plagues the Middle East, China’s military modernization is progressing at quite a rapid rate. Yet the Arab Spring has begun to reshape the region in an unprecedented way, even though Israel, the main pillar of Washington’s strategy, remains more trapped and isolated than ever before.
Through this new strategy, the Obama administration is trying to pursue a defensive plan that balances the U.S.’ new focus on ‘Asia and the Pacific’ with its continued pursuit of stability in the Middle East, a region where American interests are believed to be threatened. Obama’s opponents, especially the neo-conservatives, were quick to criticize the new strategy and consider it a military retreat that will encourage America’s enemies, especially Iran, to take advantage of the situation. Nevertheless, heavy U.S. military presence will remain in the Persian Gulf in order to protect the oil treasure.