A one-superpower world

I’m a couple of decades late but bear with me. As I was reading up on the glorious history of US foreign policy strategies, I came across the 1992 highly classified “Defense Policy Guidance” leaked document 1992 Wolfowitz U.S. Strategy Plan Document.

Almost all of the Pentagon’s post cold war aggressive military strategies such as preemptive strike, expansion of NATO, regime change, nation building, or humanitarian intervention can be traced back to this notorious blueprint for a new world order. For those who may not have read this previously, I have copied and pasted some bits that resonate loudly today.

This document prepared by the U.S. Defense Department made the case for a world dominated by one superpower and stated that America’s political and military mission in the post cold war era will be to ensure that no rival superpower is allowed to emerge in Western Europe, Asia or the territories of the former Soviet Union. The Pentagon document titled “Prevent the Re-Emergence of a New Rival” articulated the clearest rejection of collective internationalism, the strategy that emerged from the formation of United Nations. What is most important, it says, is “the sense that the world order is ultimately backed by the U.S. We must maintain the mechanisms for deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role.”

In assessing future threats, the document places great emphasis on how “the actual use of weapons of mass destruction, even in conflicts that do not directly engage U.S. interests, could spur further proliferation which in turn would threaten world order….. While the U.S. cannot become the world’s “policeman,” by assuming responsibility for righting every wrong, we will retain the pre-eminent responsibility for addressing selectively those wrongs which threaten not only our interests, but those of our allies or friends. It is improbable that a global conventional challenge to U.S. and Western security will re-emerge from the Eurasian heartland for many years to come. Our strategy must now refocus on precluding the emergence of any future potential global competitor.”

“In the Middle East and Southwest Asia, our overall objective is to remain the predominant outside power in the region and preserve U.S. and Western access to the region’s oil. We will seek to prevent the further development of a nuclear arms race on the Indian subcontinent. In this regard, we should work to have both countries, India and Pakistan, adhere to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to place their nuclear energy facilities under International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards. We should discourage Indian hegemonic aspirations over the other states in South Asia and on the Indian Ocean. With regard to Pakistan, a constructive U.S.-Pakistani military relationship will be an important element in our strategy to promote stable security conditions in Southwest Asia and Central Asia.”

Think they’ve fulfilled their greed of ultimate supremacy today? Why isn’t being a well-off, powerful, stable and secure country enough for them, why is it their mission to dominate not just the region but the entire planet? I also read up on the Noriega guy, the ex-dictator of Panama, who was once on CIA’s payroll for over 2 decades but when Uncle Sam wasn’t happy with him anymore, they invaded Panama and installed a new puppet government. :clap: Perhaps they should try competing with God next, why does He get to be bigger than them. Send your troops up there with NASA perhaps.

Re: A one-superpower world

China is the new superpower and they are smarter. They have a softer approach, take the world with cheap Chinese merchandise. The Americans can't sustain the level of military presence they have round the world right now. Add the dissatisfaction of citizens back home, US will have to decide what's more important to it, it's people or world domination. US will scale back it's military just like the Brits did when they could no longer handle their colonies or they'll perish like the Romans.

Re: A one-superpower world

Well I dont think there there can ever be a one world power, at least while I'm alive.

But from what I gather the West seeks total domination the US strategy is very much Clauswitch orientated and the Nazis like Hitler would be ever so proud of the scheme.

On the other hand the chinese are far more menacing and yet have a totally detached, almost other world attitude where they dont always directly control other countries but still help them when times are hard. The Chinese had client states and sattelite countries long before the West came up with the terms. However the Chinese let other cultures sustain thier own ways rather then try and dominate thier cultures, sure the chinese did influence other cultures but they never pushed for outward change like the US does.

Also the Chinese are masters of that almost uniquely Asian strategyu of self sacrifice and atrition warfare, in the West apart from the likes of Leonidas of Sparta and the Spanish and Italian cultures no Western nation has ever really thrown itself into conflict merely to protect other states without any direct personal gain.

Wheras China in its long history has a reputation for helping its smaller Asian nieghbours and sometimes even Arch enemies often with no long term price for the help.

The Chinese also have one over riding recipe for true superpower status and that is sheer man-power.

Man power is very under rated these days but there has never been a war in which well husband resources like man power did not win the day.

The chinese proved that against technology they have so much sheer man power that they can afford to sacrifice so much just to gain some edge over thier opponent.

Those who thing technology is the key to winning a war no nothing of warfare. Hitler had the same attitude when he Invaded Russia and the United Nations made that costly mistake in Korea.

The US just does not have the resources to sustain a global empire for very long especially using its Neo Colonial tactics. Whereas China if it was going to have an empire it would very much be restricted, China has tried to copy the West and utlise colonies but they have come to realise the weakness of that strategy and would much rather rely on other states simply becomeing clients rather than total vassals or slaves. Wheras the US seeks to dominate almost everything in the Countires it conquerors which is why it will ultimately fail.

Re: A one-superpower world

What Faris said. The guy has a good head on his shoulders. Always agree with him.

Re: A one-superpower world


Restored attachments:

Re: A one-superpower world

The way the Americans have gone about in the War on Terror, and in its garb how they are trying to encircle China and in the future their focus on Asia Pacific shows us what their long term interests would be. I dont think these policies of US are sustainable for long.

Re: A one-superpower world

Good to know. The Chinese are saner indeed.

While reading about the Noriega/Panama situation, I couldn't help but wonder what if the same could be repeated in Pakistan before it has a chance to hold fair elections in the near future. With PTI being the most popular party in Pakistan right now, the US must be worried since IK speaks of ending the slave-master relationship and building ties based on dignity and self-respect, more like the client relationship Pakistan has with China right now. With the Pentagon releasing statements like US is getting sick of Pakistan not co-operating, I do wonder if they're planning on invading Pakistan before it has a chance to elect a new, somewhat reliable government. Thank goodness for AQ Khan, I say!

Re: A one-superpower world

^US still has the generals in its pockets. generals know fully well that if any real democratic govt is to emerge, it WILL make peace with india and military influence will reduce. and gnerals don't like that. so they will come back again with ashirwaad of baba peer amreeka shareef

Re: A one-superpower world

All these generals deserve some chitrol so. Apne he mulk k sath ye sub hota dekh kar inke dil kaise nahin bhar atay.

Re: A one-superpower world

only military in the world, which occupies its own country :)

Re: A one-superpower world

What the US really need to do is deploy their army on the US-Mehico border, control the illegal immigration yo. US vs Pakistan = sanctions on Pakistan. A full on war isn't in the cards right now. Thank goodness for AQ khan, seriously? They don't need to bomb us, all they need is another Zia, to forward their agenda.

Re: A one-superpower world

People talk about the US as if it is alone but the reality is that it has many states on its side in the Western World and other areas of the world. The USA will need to rely on Europe and other Allies......a battle of the Western World Vs whoever.