History does not repeat itself, not precisely. Humans, though, have been doing similar
things for thousands of years. History
offers patterns from which we can learn.
That is to say, that there is nothing new that is wholly new.
There is too much for comfort in the current international
situation—and the U.S.
response to it—that feels like the 1930s.
The republics of the West, focused inward, struggle with economic
traumas and work hard to make them worse in the name of making things
better. National leaders even when aware
of storm clouds on the global horizons ignore them if they can, and minimize
the dangers if they cannot, applying symbolic but ineffective remedies where
action is unavoidable. Aggressive second
rate powers strive for recognition as though first rate powers, conspiring to
disrupt the international equilibrium and the peace that rests on it to get
what they want. While potential enemies
rapidly rearm, the West disarms in the name of peace, heedless of the wars
and conflicts that fill the vacuums of their military retreats. Again, I am talking about today, not the
1930s, but the parallels are disquieting.
The United
States has gotten into unwanted conflicts,
especially in the 20th Century, when adversaries miscalculated our
nation’s willingness to sacrifice to defend crucial interests. Weak-kneed, pusillanimous, or just unwise
national executives invited war by giving enemies many reasons to doubt our
will and resolve: unprepared armed
forces, verbal warnings enforced with bluster, shirked fulfillment of pledges
to help endangered friends. The Japanese
thought that isolationist and poorly armed America would seek a negotiated
settlement after Pearl Harbor, the North Koreans were confident that we were
too war-weary to defend the South, Saddam Hussein—twice—believed that we would
not want to fight a war in the sands of Iraq.
Our responses to frequent goading did little to dissuade them. Logically following our miscues they each went
too far at last. They all could have
been stopped by a determined show of strength early while war remained avoidable,
when we could have corrected their calculations at lesser cost to us and to
them.
The communist leaders of China are by nature cautious. You survive the palace intrigues of the Forbidden City by avoiding mistakes, not by making
them. But the Chinese leaders also have
big plans, increasingly marked on a global map. The leaders of the regime in power are the
heirs of their founder, Mao, who liked to refer to the United States
as a paper tiger. For a time Nixon and
Reagan disabused them of that notion, but they seem to be reconvincing
themselves of Mao’s insights. Where is
the recent evidence to the contrary?
At first, Chinese forays were camouflaged by equipping and
supporting the adventures of the proxy North Koreans. Lately, the Chinese military itself has repeatedly
hacked into U.S.
civilian and military computer systems, with efforts ranging from nuisances to
theft of military and technology secrets. The rapidly expanding Chinese navy is
now building aircraft carriers, though it has no overseas enemies. In a related effort, the Chinese are dredging
up artificial islands in the South China Sea, a thousand miles from their shores,
closer to the Philippines , Malaysia , and Vietnam
than to the southern coast of China . With naval stations and air strips on the
islands, the Chinese are asserting a dramatic expansion of territorial waters
measured from these militarized sandbars.
Connecting the dots from new island to new island (there are some half
dozen or more of these land-creation projects underway), the Chinese navy alleges
control of sea lanes and airspace, demanding that planes or ships not pass
their theoretical net without Beijing’s permission. The U.S. has made protests, recently backed
up by a reconnaissance plane flying across what has been international waters
and free airspace since before and after World War II. At least for the moment the Chinese only
fired words, eight times (according to a CNN story) warning the U.S. plane to
stay away. “This is the Chinese
navy. You go.”
This is a minor disturbance in a major geopolitical
struggle. Busy trade lanes cross the South China Sea .
In the context of Beijing’s acquisition of an offensive, MIRVed nuclear
missile arsenal now approaching the size of Russian and U.S. nuclear forces
(the U.S. being the only one developing plans to reduce its stockpile), the risks are becoming very high.
Throughout history, China’s biggest dangers have usually
been from Chinese, vulnerabilities from the outside attracted only when there
was weakness caused by internal struggles.
Might the heirs of Mao seek to distract internal discontent with
international adventurism? A lesson from
history is that the more autocratic the regime, the more likely it is to resort
to this gambit.
We need a foreign policy that convinces the Chinese leaders
how dangerous and unrewarding such moves would be. That becomes harder to do the more we allow
the Chinese to fool themselves that it might be otherwise. That
was a pattern of disaster for Tojo, Hitler, and others—and for us.
No comments:
Post a Comment