It has emerged from the various threads here that the US enjoys an advantage in almost every area of regular warfare, most crucially perhaps in the domains of C3, air dominance (stealth) and (anti-) submarine warfare. While a few decades ago, it was said that in terms of brute force Russia could overpower virtually any enemy with the sheer mass of its military assets, this no longer holds true, the Russian militry being a mere shadow of former Soviet might.
I think it's worthwile to pause for a while at this point. The reason why Russia's military contracted is twofold, the more important cause being economic bankruptcy. Even if the Soviet Union had not disintegrated the spending levels of the late 80s could not have been sustained.
Now, the US is not a centrally planned economy, nevertheless it is facing tremendous problems. The country is dead broke but it keeps going because other nations are willing to buy its dollars. Others, namely China and Japan, are buying US dollars because they want US consumers to purchase their goods they export into the United States. This whole arrangement implies a mutual dependency.
I understand very little about economics but from what I have read it appears that the US is importing goods and has found some way of not having to deliver anything of real value in return - just its paper money. Clearly, this situation can and will not continue indefinitely. The whole arrangement resembles a game of musical chairs. When the music stops, there will be a lot of pain. China is well aware that sitting on a pile of dollars could have disastrous consequences if a world recession pulls up, triggered for example by an oil-crisis.
Hence, China's aim is it, as anybody else's, to purchase or invest in tangible assets and undertake a fair distribution of its risk. As it domestic economy grows stronger, it will gradually try to get rid of its vast dollar reserve holdings.
Nobody can tell how the process will proceed. China might well one day find itself in a similar position as the US after World War one, suddenly finding itself unable to sell its goods because of a grave world economic crisis. But it is certain that perceptions will ultimately collapse to the fundamentals with regards to the world economy. The United States is living on the tick and this cannot continue forever. Observers have been remarking that US population growth is much higher than in Europe but in my view they fail to see that this is largely a reflection of what has been said before: Would millions of Mexicans attempt to come to the US if ecomic conditions were harsher by the order of a magnitude? Maybe, but then they might come as looters and invaders, not queueing up anymore at the immigration office. Talking about immigration, with every 3rd black American in his twenties being either in prison, on parole or facing court the United States is facing huge domestic problems which will also make themselves felt at some stage.
This post is not an attempt at America-bashing. The example of the British Empire is a good case to be studied. Its colonies becoming a burden, its industries obsolete, Britain had to quickly bury its global ambitions after the Second World War and was accomodated into Nato's auxiliary forces. After the end of the First World War it had attained its greatest territorial expansion, 40 years later the game was over. What I am trying to say is that we may have to be careful when making statements like "in 40 years China (e.g.) may have a 5th generation fighter but then the US will have laser beams in space and a UAV bomber fleet". Such predictions suggesting a contintuation of America's hegemonic position in world affairs may well turn out to be correct, however, they are based on the extrapolation of current figures, expenditure on research on development for the military and internal stability. Most certainly, however, a fundamental correction is due which will lead to a different balance over the next 50 years.
With kind regards
Andrew
I think it's worthwile to pause for a while at this point. The reason why Russia's military contracted is twofold, the more important cause being economic bankruptcy. Even if the Soviet Union had not disintegrated the spending levels of the late 80s could not have been sustained.
Now, the US is not a centrally planned economy, nevertheless it is facing tremendous problems. The country is dead broke but it keeps going because other nations are willing to buy its dollars. Others, namely China and Japan, are buying US dollars because they want US consumers to purchase their goods they export into the United States. This whole arrangement implies a mutual dependency.
I understand very little about economics but from what I have read it appears that the US is importing goods and has found some way of not having to deliver anything of real value in return - just its paper money. Clearly, this situation can and will not continue indefinitely. The whole arrangement resembles a game of musical chairs. When the music stops, there will be a lot of pain. China is well aware that sitting on a pile of dollars could have disastrous consequences if a world recession pulls up, triggered for example by an oil-crisis.
Hence, China's aim is it, as anybody else's, to purchase or invest in tangible assets and undertake a fair distribution of its risk. As it domestic economy grows stronger, it will gradually try to get rid of its vast dollar reserve holdings.
Nobody can tell how the process will proceed. China might well one day find itself in a similar position as the US after World War one, suddenly finding itself unable to sell its goods because of a grave world economic crisis. But it is certain that perceptions will ultimately collapse to the fundamentals with regards to the world economy. The United States is living on the tick and this cannot continue forever. Observers have been remarking that US population growth is much higher than in Europe but in my view they fail to see that this is largely a reflection of what has been said before: Would millions of Mexicans attempt to come to the US if ecomic conditions were harsher by the order of a magnitude? Maybe, but then they might come as looters and invaders, not queueing up anymore at the immigration office. Talking about immigration, with every 3rd black American in his twenties being either in prison, on parole or facing court the United States is facing huge domestic problems which will also make themselves felt at some stage.
This post is not an attempt at America-bashing. The example of the British Empire is a good case to be studied. Its colonies becoming a burden, its industries obsolete, Britain had to quickly bury its global ambitions after the Second World War and was accomodated into Nato's auxiliary forces. After the end of the First World War it had attained its greatest territorial expansion, 40 years later the game was over. What I am trying to say is that we may have to be careful when making statements like "in 40 years China (e.g.) may have a 5th generation fighter but then the US will have laser beams in space and a UAV bomber fleet". Such predictions suggesting a contintuation of America's hegemonic position in world affairs may well turn out to be correct, however, they are based on the extrapolation of current figures, expenditure on research on development for the military and internal stability. Most certainly, however, a fundamental correction is due which will lead to a different balance over the next 50 years.
With kind regards
Andrew