So, I’m reading this book, The Age of Turbulence by Alan Greenspan. It’s basically a cross between an autobiography and a sort of “Capitalist Manifesto”. He traces the progress of Capitalism throughout the world, and I found a passage in his chapter about East Asia particularly intriguing:
“US History after World War II chronicles two military defeats in our war to contain Communism. The first was the rapid retreat of US forces in the face of masses of Chinese military crossing the Yalu River into North Korea in the winter of 1950; the second, our humiliation in abandoning South Vietnam in 1975. We may have lost the battles, but not the war. Both Communist China and Communist Vietnam have been struggling to loosen their central-planning straitjackets for the economic freedom of capitalism, while trying not to say out loud what they are doing. In 2006, America’s Merrill Lynch, following Citigroup a year earlier, obtained the right to buy, sell, and market Vietnamese shares on Ho Chi Minh City’s fledgling stock exchange. When Bill Gates, the world’s richest capitalist, visited Hanoi, he was greeted by Vietnam’s top Communist Party leaders and mobbed in admiration. Will miracles never cease? Ideas do matter. Indeed America’s capitalistic ideas appear mightier than our sword.” (page 316)
Anyway, I thought he raised an interesting point, which is rather pertinent to our foreign policy here in America. We have other, better weapons at our disposal besides military force to topple other regimes, if we care to use them. Greespan talks about the fall of the Soviet Union as the end of an world “experiment” that tested the viability of centrally planned Communist government systems. In the end, it wasn’t military conflict that settled the score between the USA and the USSR, it was a lanslide victory on the battlefield of economics. We outproduced them, to the point that their own citizens saw that their governing system was not credible.
In the long run, this seems like the way our future victories should play out. Greatness in the modern world does not hinge solely upon military dominance. If we want other nations to come over to our side, rather than force their hand through military action, we should do our best to make sure our system is among the best and most competitive in the world, sending our ideas, not our bombs, to other countries. If we make our country great, other countries will eventually want to share in what we have, and change of their own accord.
If you look at what other countries love about us (and I speak only for those Western countries to which I have traveled), it is primarily our exported products: films, music, Coke, Starbuck’s, iPods, etc. If you look at what they hate about us, it is generally our ignorance of other countries, and the arrogance of our government, primarily displayed through our military intervention. Both of these aspects of the “Ugly American” have been prominently displayed throughout the course of the war in Iraq.
Terrorism is a product of hatred and desperation. Killing, as a general rule, only begets more killing. It generally only ends when one or both sides are so exhausted or worn down that they decide to resolve their differences. Israel’s attempts to dominate Palestinians with military force has resulted in countless terrorist acts against them. After half a century, the sides finally began to wear down and consent to peace talks (the option that might actually work). There is still a great deal of progress to be made, obviously, but we’ve clearly seen which approach doesn’t work.
The Roman Empire was founded upon military might. They had great social and technological advances that those around them did not (e.g. democracy, plumbing, irrigation, etc. ) However, continued expansion through military force eventually led to an overexpanded empire that could not control its own subjugated citizens, and brought about its own downfall.
At this point, we have killed many times more civilians in Iraq than those Americans that were killed on September 11th. At some point, we have to wonder if the ends justify the means in terms of human lives. If we kill thousands of peaceful Iraqi citizens, are we really preventing terrorism, or are we simply fostering more anti-American sentiment that will almost certainly lead to more terrorism in the future?
If we want to be the greatest power in the world, we need to bring that about with international goodwill, not force — convincing with our ideas, not our sword.
BTW, I would highly recommend this Greespan book to anyone who is considering reading it. That guy is one smart cookie. Tootles.
Tags: Capitalism, Economy, Greenspan, War
