Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armed Forces of the World Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Realignment of World Powers in near future
YelliChink    7/7/2010 11:47:17 AM
With the decline of US power and prestige around the world, it is inevitable that nations around the world will either take this opportunity to expand their strength, power and influence, or seek measures for protection and preservation. The time is coming for the realignment of world powers. It is a very broad issue and will be discussed in segments.
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3   NEXT
YelliChink    Anglosphere   7/7/2010 12:15:43 PM
First thing first. The Anglosphere.
The definition of Anglosphere is countries founded and still hold majority by descendents of Anglo-Saxon or people who adopted Anglo culture and speak English as their mother tongue. The core of Anglosphere is consisted of the US, the UK, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. Others include Jamaica and Bahamas, but those countries are less significant on world stages.
The decline of economic and cultural influence from Anglosphere to the rest of the world will be the single most tragic event in early 21th century. Nevertheless, geographically, Anglo nations are safe from direct invasion by any other powers. In the coming decades, it is expected that nations of Anglosphere will still stick together as close allies.
The challenge for Anglo nations in the future is that they are losing advantage on politics, economy and technology as friendly and rival powers rise. In short, they can no longer dominate the world stage, and must seek allies to consolidate their mutual position around the world. By taking partners, you also take enemies. There are some intrinsic enemy and some firend-of-my-enemy. The realignment starts when nations re-evaluate their position and interests. Who will remain as friends? Who will turn their back on Anglo nations and become enemies? Who will be pushed to hostile side? Those are the questions.
Quote    Reply

YelliChink    China and Russia   7/7/2010 12:52:52 PM
As a emerging power, China seems to be on the rising side. They gained tremendously from US-dominated world trade system, and they've gamed the system so far to advance their position. However, the rulers in Beijing are more reminiscent to the imperial court of Qing than the Revolutionists. They do not like an open society and they will not let loose their grip on everything in China, which include unfair trade policy and advantage. This will further anger traders and business circule in the West, and hence start a major schism between China and the West.
Taiwan can be considered a lost to the US and a win to China. The US does not realize the impact of ECFA to Taiwan and does not realize what they are doing is paving ways for an Anschluss. South Koreans and Japanese, on the other hand, do not like that to happen. They also do not feel like increasingly more assertive China. It is unlikely that they will bow down to the demand of Beijing and become a vassal state again. Therefore, they will do whatever it takes to prevent that from happening. One measure is to drag the US into the situation with treaties and obligations, and hence throttling the fast on the highway toward hostility.
The emergence of US-Korean-Nippon alliance to counter Chinese desire of hedgmon is inevitable.
The other nation that matters is Russia, which is currently under control of gang from former KGB agents. They have no love of China and Chinese culture, and they have no love to the US. However, it isn't in their best interest to alienate both sides. Due to geographical proximity, they will probably do more favor to China, but not to the degree that they will be deemed as if they were on Chinese side. They will play relatively neutral position and a hard player to both sides. Until things change and their national survival is threatened. There are a lot to say about Russia in Central Asia, Middle East, Caucasus and East Europe. Their problem is that they have too much in stake at too many seemingly unrelated front, but they do not have enough capability to pursue all of them. And, sometimes, interest from one front contradict the other. Russian position is rather interesting, and only one with deep understanding of Russian culture, history, tradition, politics and geography can predict what Russians will do.
Quote    Reply

YelliChink    India and Pakistan   7/7/2010 1:52:08 PM
So far the scenario are just boring and pretty much predictable. Not quite so in South Asia.
In the past during the Cold War, India and Pakistan chose to be closer to Soviet Union and the US respectively. The Indian choice was based on communist infiltratoin and influence over Indian elite/ruling class and were focused on post-colonialism rather than advancement of the society. This ideological choice is the tragedy of modern India. The result is that the society reform itself at slower pace with very little economic progress.
Pakistanis enacted their foreign policy based on one thing and one thing only: counter India. Nevertheless, they've learned a hard lesson in the Third India-Pakistan War that the US isn't a very countable ally to them. Chinese-Pakistani alliance is based on strategic convenience at the beginning, and both parties found the alliance more than convenient later on. India, on the other hand, is now facing strategic encirclement by China from all sides. China's growing influence on Bangladesh and Sri Lanka should make India nervous. However, traditional subversion strategy doesn't work on India from Chinese perspective. Therefore, they have to actively engaged in regime change (Nepal), buying allies (Bangladesh, Sri Lanka) and strengthening useful ally (Pakistan). It is also highly suspicious that Maoist terrorists in India is supported cladestinely by and serve as an instrument to Beijing.
Unfortunately, Indian elites are just as delusional as Nehru. Time will come when they have to choose sides.
Time will also come to Pakistan when they have to reveal their true intention, but they (i.e., the military oligarch who actually run that country) are crystal clear about the situation. Obama's Afghan war is in direct contradictory to Pakistan's national interest. They have very little incentive to support the war, and very little to gain from McChrystal's vision. The continual pseudo support of the US war efforts backfired and may cause further rupture in their political system and social fabric. What is in their best interests is to create a situation which the Coalitoin have to leave and deligate 1 billion dollar worth of minerals to them. Before that could happen, they will play double sided. After the withdraw of the West, they will be free to pursue their true agenda.
Not that Iranians don't want that 1 billion dollar worth of minerals. However, both sides need China more than they hate each other. They also have various internal and external conflicts to deal with. Chances are, Pakistan has higher chance to get that at consents from both Beijing and the West.
A few things need to happen first before realignment will happen in South Asia. First, the West has to withdraw from Afghanistan and Central Asia; Second, India will be surprised by sudden increase in hostility and aggression from China. This will come as economic destabilization and increasing terrorist attacks against India.
India suits better than China to be the hub of labor-intensive industry than China for Europeans. Unfortunately, Beijing is smart enough to know who to prevent that from happening. Until then, India will be reluctant to take side, but it will happen.
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar    An excellent analysis, YC   7/7/2010 2:09:57 PM
that ultimately damns the fool, Carter; the treasonous Clintons, both inept Bushes, and that damned fool Marxist thug we have in 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue now.
Quote    Reply

Armchair Private       7/7/2010 4:09:52 PM

"Who will remain as friends? Who will turn their back on Anglo nations and become enemies? Who will be pushed to hostile side? Those are the questions."

 Yes. Plus:" alt="" /> "Until then, India will be reluctant to take side, but it will happen."

 My only slight disagreement is that if China is clever, she will avoid forcing India into the arms of the Anglosphere. Chinese support of Pakistan may be do just that though." alt="" /> "and only one with deep understanding of Russian culture, history, tradition, politics and geography can predict what Russians will do."

 Agreed. Anyone here fancy a guess?

 Given China's internal contradictions (unless China proves over the next 50 yrs that a free(ish) market and an authoritarian society are not mutually contradictory); the fact that literally millions of young men are gonna grow up unable to find a young woman due to the one child policy and gender based abortion, and the fact that China's leaders probably cannot afford a recession as it would threaten their control, it's hard to imagine them not going to war with someone. In which case - and barring nukes - doesn't Siberia look tastier than Uttar Pradesh?

 The only other thing to throw in the mix is some of the Malthusian predictions around water, food and energy shortages. History suggests that in times of trial countries drift more and more into something that would to our eyes look like National Socialisim. Strong and well embedded institutions are the main defense against this, so Democracies should ally with other countries that have these, and perhaps attempt to encourage and stimulate their further development in likely future Great Powers.

Quote    Reply

YelliChink    Middle East   7/7/2010 4:41:05 PM
Wait, I'm not done yet.
Middle East is where the real beef is. For better or worse, there will be major change in the Middle East in the near future. There are several possibilities depending on how the West (esp. the US) withdraw power, influence and military presence in the region. A fast withdraw will throw the region into total chaos and possible sole dominant power afterwards. A moderate withdraw will allow regional powers to align with each other before bringing themselves into total war. A slower pace withdraw will be likely to allow sole power to ascend and dominate at the time of pull out.
Since all powers in the region are very dangerous, a moderate approach is best for the US interests. A WWI style war with every competing power rushes in to gain what's left over as Iraq is most devastating. Devastating and destruction is necessary for the region. The four players on four corners are Iran, Turkey, Egypt and Bedouin monarchs on Arab Peninsula. Syria, Lebanon and Jordan don't matter. They are side dishes in the eyes of the vultures and hyenas.
Ok, that's the general points. Now for some specifics:
Iraq will never get a chance they deserve to build their own country into a modern state. It seems that the people are fed enough with violence and don't believe in radical Islam at all. After all, they are the ones who can compare between Americans, British and all sorts of theothugs. However, things will be completely out of their control once Americans leave them to the wolves. A democracy in the middle of brutal dictatorship is like a sheep surrounded by lions, or a ham in the middle of a group of weasels, or a honey bee hive in the middle of several hornet nests. Go figure. The desire of outside forces will tear the country apart, and what's left as Iraq will trigger a major conflict in the region.
The Gulf Arabs want to keep their grip of power and domination over Shi'ite population. They will be the ones who want to contain and keep Iran weak. They can't do so themselves, and they are doing whatever they can to get Americans do their deeds. They are also the kind of guys who fund radical Sunni Islamists and Al Jazeera. If their true nature is exposed to American public, then I doubt there will be much sympathy left for them had them been dethroned or exiled by the Iranians. Fighting to keep them will eventually get you backstabbed anyway. If they can't get the US or the West to cover them, then they will try to get Russians, Turks, Egyptians, Indians, Pakistanis or even the Jews onboard. If Iranians are smart enough, then they will incite violence against Israel at the same time, forcing an Bedouin-Israeli alliance which is basically death sentence to the Arab monarchs. The chance of survival for Arab monarchs are bleak, but they won't go down without spinning the conflict completely out of control.
Both Egypt and Turkey will not sit there and allow the reconquest of Sassanid Empire. What Iranians will need to do is to keep Pakistanis out of this sh!t and keep China and Russia to support their agenda. That's actually pretty hard for the Iranians. China want low oil price while Russia want it high. Russia would like to see ME totally destabilized to further its economic interests. China do not want to see total chaos in the region, and they need the oil to keep their economy going. Before Iranians pull the stunt, they need to work with radical elements within Pakistani government to sabotage any peace progress in Kashmir. They also need to agitate hostility between China and India. Otherwise they have no chance of winning the war had Pakistanis find it appropriate to work for the Arab monarchs and get a cut of profit themselves. The proposed pipeline is another tool to keep Pakis out of this. There is no doubt that they will engage in cladestine wars first, and decide whether to use military force later.
Ostensibly Turkey cares only about Kurdish problem, but Erdogan and Turkish Islamists have greater ideas. However, as the US withdraw from Iraq and diminish its influence and security obligations in the region, Turks will be forced to take matters into their own hands. They are the ones who are most likely to seek military solution in Iraq first, and trigger direct military confrontation in the region. What happened after Turkey incursion into Iraq will be total chaos. In any case, Turks will fight the Iranians and both sides will deplete each other by the end of the conflict. If Tehran gets nukes, then Ankara will get nukes as well. The conflict will force Turkey to reclaim friendship with the West.
Quote    Reply

WarNerd       7/8/2010 5:23:05 AM

The emergence of US-Korean-Nippon alliance to counter Chinese desire of hedgmon is inevitable.

Why not an India-Korean-Nippon-South East Asia alliance?  China is a scary neighbor which could give them common cause.
Quote    Reply

injun       7/8/2010 1:02:08 PM
Strangely, it looks as though India is getting closer and closer to the US via sneaky backhand diplomacy ie. Israel.  India and Israel have been firmly brought together by virtue of being the foremost victims of islamic terrorism. Now they are hand in glove in a lot of things from shared intelligence, to UAVs to missiles, training etc. Just look at the volume and type of stuff that India now routinely buys from Israel. No possibility of this happening without a furtive nod from the US. Can you imagine US inking a nuclear deal with a country that refuses to sign either the CTBT or the NPT. Well as they say, in politics there are no permanent friends or enemies.
Quote    Reply

Photon       7/8/2010 7:06:38 PM
WN:  Why not an India-Korean-Nippon-South East Asia alliance?  China is a scary neighbor which could give them common cause.
South Korea & Japan -- could be problematic, if you are familiar with their 20th century history and beyond, unless both of of them maintain strong ties with the US.  If sensitive issues (i.e., the Liancourt Rocks and the conscription of Korean women and their mistreatment during WW2) ever get out of hand, the only ones out there who can keep them under tight leash is the US (as the 'glue') and North Korea (as their common neighboring threat).  On the other hand, both China and South Korea do not have much feeling for Japan.
Southeast Asia -- depends on which one (the US or China) has more to offer.  Key SEA countries for the US, insofar as I am concerned -- the Philippines and Singapore, and going further south, Australia and New Zealand.  Others like Indonesia, Malaysia, and Vietnam are likely to stay uncertain as long as the current status quo remains, insofar as US-based system of military alliance is concerned.
Quote    Reply

markrigh    what about old europe   7/8/2010 8:52:43 PM
China and India has raised in power mainly because their population is sustaining their economic growth.
USA dominance will soon be overturned by these countries (50 years +).
It is just a matter of time that USA and European Union will strengthed their ties because culturally they are similar.
Think about it: USA + EU = 1 billion of inhabitants (in a distant futur). 

Quote    Reply
1 2 3   NEXT