This ran in the Asia Times for awhile, I am republishing it here as it reinforces multiple themes I frequently comment on.

Beyond the Great Illusion

by Greg R. Lawson
 

Is the world careening to a new world disorder?  There are numerous analysts who think that this view is anachronistic and merely doom and gloom pessimism that recalls Spenglerian decline while ignoring the rise of new centers of power amidst the overall positive benefits of a globalized economy.  To some, once the economic and credit crisis ends and a new global financial architecture is erected, we will be able to move forward into a world of grand, "social justice."  Some even dream of a world of "Global Zero" and no nuclear weapons.

Yes, they say, America may decline, but new and vigorous nations will rise to compensate and provide order in its place.  Indeed, many even argue America will benefit from this as its long time role as Atlas holding the world on its shoulder can end with a shrug as opposed to a debacle.  Of course, this is only if America acts gracefully and loses its haughty arrogance.

Perhaps, this is true.  Perhaps, civilized man has reached a point where we can be sanguine about the future.  Yet, we’ve been here before.  Only a mere century ago man thought the world would never devolve into catastrophic warfare because economic interdependence would make it too costly.  Famous books were written to bring home that point.  Books like Norman Angell’s “Great Illusion” clearly made the elite opinion of the day swoon, just as today we have “The World is Flat.” 

A single day in June 1914 put an end to that “Great Illusion.” 

Today, we face a world on the precipice of entering a “Golden Age of Proliferation.”  The unfolding challenges to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in the current guise of Iran and North Korea , along with initial steps towards possible nuclearization in many other nations such as Burma and Venezuela , offer us a glimpse into the future.

Certainly, not all of these nations will develop weapons technology.  But some might and probably will.  The need for nuclear power for domestic energy consumption is imminently reasonable, yet it can be a subterfuge within which to hide a military purpose.  Even this, is not necessarily unreasonable.  Indeed, depending on what neighborhood one is in, it might seem a no brainer to develop nuclear weapons as leverage or defense.  After all, they are the great equalizers, the weapon that while expensive, is far less expensive than maintaining a conventional force capable of opposing the U.S. or even regional powers like China , Russia , Pakistan , or soon North Korea and Iran .

This is ultimately unstoppable.  There will be a world with many nuclear power states in varying stages of potential weaponization.  This will be a highly unstable situation as even Great Powers will now have greater difficulties than ever before in providing some semblance of stability in their regions.  The relatively weak, will have greater power than ever.  This will ultimately not be the power to make the world better, but the power to unleash the kind of damage it used to take huge armies and/or industrialized nations to wreak and this doesn't even include non-state actors such as terrorists.

Obviously, the feverish diplomatic efforts to stop North Korea and Iran persist. Efforts to reinvigorate the non-proliferation regime are also afoot.  However, every new “deal” appears to buy time for those on the outside of the international system to continue their drive to obtain the technology necessary to intimidate neighbors and extort further concessions from the world at large.  And each occasion when that time is bought only shreds the non-proliferation regime even more.

Beyond this world of proliferation, we also see the rise of sleeping dragons and the resurgence of what was thought merely a decade ago to be sleeping bears.  New powers and old powers all jostling again for position in the international system. 

While our sanguine analysts predict that these nations can be made into responsible “stakeholders”, this is an open question.  Certainly, it is a possibility, but can good policy and strategy count on this?   Or must it be prepared to deal with the unexpected?

These realities must be confronted.  They will only metastasize should America retrench to focus on domestic reforms. For who is ready to step in to fill the void that would be left by the United States?  Indeed, the world might get a heavy dose of “non-polarity” as opposed to “multi-polarity.” 

It is time to move beyond rhetoric and realize that we are always teetering on an abyss.  Statesmanship and wisdom are the necessary means to avoid tipping over.  However, before addressing this, Americans need to understand the full context of the world we live in and understand the threats we face without hyperbole, but also without naivety.

Every generation thinks itself the one to "end war" for all time and create a "just" world order.  Each generation is disabused of these notions as reality stares them in the face. 

The current American generation needs to become disabused sooner than previous ones for the storms brewing beneath the surface of our false tranquility (even after the economic crisis) are real and will not be tamed by rhetoric, resolutions, and vague concepts of hopeful cooperation.  They will be tamed by eternal vigilance and recognition that even as the world undergoes profound transformations, fundamentally, man is still man. The old emotions, so well described by Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War, of envy, fear, and greed are just as present now as love, respect, and humility. 

While more of the latter is to be hoped for, more of the former should be prepared for.  We must move beyond our own “great illusion” and defend order rather than expecting it to spontaneously emerge through economics and international treaties that are unable to be backed up.