Will a Robust America Make a Comeback? 20 Years after Tragedy, It Must Avoid Clash with China

Published in Nikkei
(Japan) on 6 September 2021
by Mikio Sugeno (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Eric Stimson. Edited by Gillian Palmer.
There’s a fire truck with the end of its ladder lost in the building’s warped iron pillars. The exhibits of the 9/11 Memorial & Museum at the site of the World Trade Center that collapsed after they were attacked by two passenger planes will tug at your heart. Twenty years have passed since the coordinated terror attacks against America in 2001. A woman visiting the museum from Texas tells me, “The scene was unimaginable. I always want to pray to God whenever I think of the victims.”*

The opening of the 21st century took a dark tragic turn when al-Qaida, an international terrorist organization, mercilessly destroyed the symbols of prosperity in the world’s strongest country. The war in Afghanistan, the longest war in American history, began as revenge against the Taliban, an Islamist group, and reached its bitter conclusion with the revival of the Taliban and its triumphal seizure of Afghanistan following the American military’s indifferent withdrawal.

A Turning Point in the Pursuit of Free Competition

How have the last 20 years transpired? The fact that the situation in Afghanistan has reverted nearly to where it started leaves big questions for the post-terror world. And how will the next 20 years be? I tried to think about this as I interviewed three observers who’ve watched the changes in the global order.

Bill Emmott, former editor-in-chief of The Economist, believes the war that began on 9/11 was a “war without victors.” He says that “al-Qaida lost. Osama bin Laden, the mastermind behind the coordinated terror, was killed. But America was forced to sacrifice a lot of money and blood in the war and its international role weakened.”*

At the time of the coordinated terrorist attack, globalization and free competition dominated the trend in world economics. The idea was that easing the exchange of goods and services would make everyone richer. The euro, Europe’s single currency, had been introduced two years earlier, boosting its Europe’s competitiveness as a community. Information technology was expected to enhance economic activity and everyday convenience.

Twenty years later, a series of models have reached a turning point. The idea of prioritizing efficiency and profit is attracting strong criticism from the public, and social considerations like fairness and mitigating inequality have become vital.

The COVID-19 catastrophe has led to big government in every country, with America leading the way. British historian Niall Ferguson calls this Keynes’s counterattack. He believes that the trend of permitting massive financial expenditure, which began with the global financial crisis of 2008, will intensify, and inflation like that of the 1970s will return.

Chinese-American relations have also changed. In 2001, it was none other than America that pushed for China’s admission to the World Trade Organization behind the scenes. The fleeting expectation that China would eventually endorse free trade as well was betrayed. Under President Xi Jinping, who increased the level of authoritarianism in his country, China competed fiercely with America in high technology and security, and the relationship has become confrontational.

“Mutual trust between China and America vanished during the COVID-19 disaster. Every country put itself first and doubled down on mercantilism. Right after the coordinated terrorist attack on America, even Russia joined the allies to help the U.S. There was strong cooperation during the financial crisis at the Group of 20 summit. It was very different from today’s world order.” Ian Bremmer, CEO of America’s Eurasia Group, tells of the ensuing hardship.

History’s Lesson: It’s Easy for War To Break Out When Great Powers Lose Strength

Emmott, Ferguson and Bremmer agree that Chinese-American relations are the greatest concern for the next 20 years.
Ferguson says that America and China have entered a second Cold War. “The possibility of a hot war is extremely high. A localized war in Taiwan or somewhere may break out soon,” he notes. He worries that “great wars occur when the aggressor thinks that speedy action is to its advantage and great powers fail to prevent them. The Biden administration pulling out of Afghanistan is an omen that America won’t necessarily fight at any cost.”*

“The world will become a little more dangerous,” Bremmer says. “Along with the absence of a policeman, there is no common ground or sense of trust.”* Emmott asserts that “the worst possibility would be a true war between superpowers. When America and democracy weaken, that may occur.”*

But the three observers are not entirely pessimistic. In each of their comments, I heard the expectation that America would survive the upheaval in democracy and overcome the decline in its status as a world leader. And its vitality will rebound in the medium term.

“America’s taking a long rehabilitation course; it’ll recover,” Emmott said.* Emmott anticipates that the process that continued for about 15 years beginning in 1975 will repeat itself. It was a time when America regained the confidence it lost after the defeat in the Vietnam War and Watergate.

Ferguson also predicts that “the general idea that America will decline and China will expand will end in error,” and estimates that there is a 66% chance of a medium-term recovery for America. This is because he sees China, which governs by concentrating its power in the hands of a few and through large-scale surveillance, as a “completely unsustainable model.”*

The problem is that process. “It’s important for America to get over its divisions and maintain its position as the strongest country,” Bremmer says.* Bremmer says it is vital for the American government to push through policies that restore the faith of the middle class by addressing inequality and for allies like Japan to urge America and China to cooperate over epidemics and climate change.

Social Media Encourages Social Divisions

Increasing numbers of people are getting biased information from social media, which creates social divisions and turbulence in a democracy. Giant information technology firms have overwhelmed the digital world and “become players that determine geopolitics,” according to Bremmer.* Regulating technological power is also a difficult issue.

Emmott is looking forward to the appearance of “a leader like former President Reagan to pep the people up.”* Biden is spending his political capital on America’s deep divisions, and the chaotic military withdrawal from Afghanistan is affecting how his administration is functioning. Can we expect a leader to emerge who would draw a line on Donald Trump’s policies and “ restore America’s confidence and optimism, in Ferguson’s words?

The latent power of the world’s strongest country, which ended its longest war and looks ahead to another 20 years, will determine the course of a dangerous world.

*Editor’s note: Although accurately translated, these quoted remarks could not be independently verified.


激しく変形したビルの鉄柱に、はしごの先を失った消防車。旅客機2機の衝突で崩落した世界貿易センターの跡地に立つ9.11記念博物館の展示に胸が締め付けられる。2001年の米同時テロから20年がたつ。テキサス州から博物館を訪れた女性は「想像を絶する光景だった。いつまでも犠牲者を思い、神に祈りたい」と語る。

国際テロ組織アルカイダが最強国の繁栄の象徴を容赦なく破壊した惨劇に、21世紀の幕開けは暗転した。イスラム主義組織タリバンへの報復で始まり、米史上最長に及んだアフガニスタン戦争は、タリバンの復権とアフガン制圧の凱旋をよそに米軍が撤収するという苦い幕切れを迎えた。

自由競争の追求は曲がり角

この20年はなんだったのか。振り出しに戻ったようなアフガン情勢はテロ後の世界に大きな疑問を残す。そして次の20年はどうなるのか。国際秩序の変化を見渡す3人の論客にインタビューで問いかけながら、考えてみた。

英エコノミスト誌元編集長のビル・エモット氏は9.11で始まった戦争を「勝者不在」と断じる。「アルカイダは負けた。同時テロの首謀者ウサマ・ビンラディンは殺された。だが米国も多大な資金と流血を伴う戦争を強いられ、国際的な役目を弱めた」と語る。

同時テロ当時、世界経済の潮流にあったのはグローバル化や自由競争の追求だった。モノやサービスの行き来を円滑にして互いを豊かにする発想だ。欧州では単一通貨ユーロがその2年前に導入され、共同体として競争力を高める動きが盛んだった。情報技術(IT)は経済活動や生活の利便性を高める要素として期待された。

20年後のいま、一連のモデルは曲がり角にある。効率や利益を最優先する姿勢は世論の強い批判を浴び、公正の確保や格差の是正など社会的な配慮が必須になった。

新型コロナウイルスの災禍は米国を筆頭に各国を「大きな政府」へといざなった。英歴史学者のニーアル・ファーガソン氏はこれを「ケインズの逆襲」と呼ぶ。08年の世界金融危機に始まった巨額の財政支出を容認する流れがさらに強まり「1970年代のようなインフレが再来する」と指摘する。

米国と中国の関係も一変した。01年、中国の世界貿易機関(WTO)への加盟を後押ししたのは他ならぬ米国だった。自由経済の理念にやがて中国も同調するとの淡い期待は裏切られた。中国は強権度を増す習近平(シー・ジンピン)国家主席のもとで、ハイテクでも安全保障でも米国と激しく競合し、対抗する関係になった。

「コロナ禍で米中の相互信頼は消えた。各国は自国優先主義と重商主義を深めた。米同時テロの直後は同盟国に加えてロシアですら米国を助けた。金融危機で20カ国・地域首脳会議(G20サミット)は深く協調した。当時と今の世界秩序は大違いだ」。米ユーラシア・グループのイアン・ブレマー社長は難局の到来を告げる。

歴史の教訓、列強が力を失うと戦争は起きやすい

次の20年、最大の懸念が米中関係にあることで3人は一致する。

米中が「第2次冷戦」にあると断言するファーガソン氏は「『熱い戦争』の可能性は非常に高い。台湾かどこかで局所的な戦いが近く起きるかもしれない」とみる。「大きな戦争は攻める側が早めの行動が有利と考え、列強が抑止に失敗した時に起きる。バイデン政権がアフガンから手を引いたのは米国が何が何でも戦うわけではないという兆候だ」と懸念する。

「今後の世界は一段と危険になる。『警察官』の不在に加え、共通の基準や信頼感がないからだ」とブレマー氏は語る。エモット氏も「最悪の可能性は超大国による実際の戦争だ。米国や民主主義が弱まっているときにそれが起こりうる」と身構える。

だが悲観一色ではない。目下の民主主義の揺らぎや世界のリーダーとしての地位低下を乗り越え、中期的に米国の頑健さが復活するとの期待感がそろって聞かれた。

「米国は長い『回復訓練』を経て立ち直る」。エモット氏は1975年のベトナム戦争の敗北や直前のウォーターゲート事件で失った信用を米国が15年近くかけて回復した過程の再来を期待する。

ファーガソン氏も「米国が衰退し、中国は伸長するという一般的な通念は間違いに終わる」と予想し、米国の中期的な復調の可能性を66%とはじく。少数への権力集中や大規模な監視を通じて統治する中国が「完全に維持不可能なモデルだ」と読んでいるからだ。

問題はその過程だ。「米国の分断を緩和し、最強国の座を維持することが重要だ」。ブレマー氏は米政府に中所得層の信頼回復に向けた格差是正策、日本など同盟国には疫病や気候変動で米中に協力を促す努力が必要と訴える。

SNSが社会の分断を助長

SNS(交流サイト)で偏った情報を得る人々が増え、社会の分断や民主主義の動揺が起きている。巨大IT企業はデジタルの世界を席巻し「地政学を左右するプレーヤーになった」(ブレマー氏)。テックの力の制御も難題だ。

エモット氏は「レーガン元大統領のように国民を元気づけるリーダー」の登場を心待ちにする。バイデン大統領は米国の深刻な分断に政治資本をすり減らし、アフガンからの米軍撤収時の混乱も政権運営に影響を及ぼす。トランプ路線とも一線を画し「米国の自信と楽観論を取り戻す」(ファーガソン氏)指導者は出てくるのか。

最長の戦争を終え、次の20年への原点に立つ最強国の底力が、危険な世界の針路を左右する。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Topics

Poland: Meloni in the White House. Has Trump Forgotten Poland?*

Germany: US Companies in Tariff Crisis: Planning Impossible, Price Increases Necessary

Japan: US Administration Losing Credibility 3 Months into Policy of Threats

Mauritius: Could Trump Be Leading the World into Recession?

India: World in Flux: India Must See Bigger Trade Picture

Palestine: US vs. Ansarallah: Will Trump Launch a Ground War in Yemen for Israel?

Ukraine: Trump Faces Uneasy Choices on Russia’s War as His ‘Compromise Strategy’ Is Failing

Related Articles

Germany: US Companies in Tariff Crisis: Planning Impossible, Price Increases Necessary

Japan: US Administration Losing Credibility 3 Months into Policy of Threats

India: World in Flux: India Must See Bigger Trade Picture

Hong Kong: Can US Tariffs Targeting Hong Kong’s ‘Very Survival’ Really Choke the Life out of It?

Cuba: Trump, Panama and the Canal