No. One can list pages worth of US toys (nuclear bombs, missiles, satellites) to "prove" how US is more powerful than past empires. Power is not an absolute measurement. Power is a relative thing - your ability compared with your peers. Both the Mongol and British empires could afford to dominate everyone else in the known world.
What is the ground reality for the US? Russia could easily run over an US ally and annex Crimea. All the US President could do was fume. Syria could bomb civilians, Iran could acquire nuclear bombs, Talibans could resurface, North Koreans would joke at US restrictions and anti-American governments all over the world could rise. Could anyone have done this against the Mongols under Genghiz Khan or even the British empire at its heights?
Power is not the mere possession of toys. Power is not the mere ownership of big boats all over the world's oceans. Power is the ability to influence (how many times was US able to convince the UN to do anything). Power is the ability to project and protect your interest. Whether it is Somali pirates or Afghan terrorists or Iranian mullahs, US is often tripped even by the weakest nations.
Not just now. Even under Eisenhower (when US was its peak) and when Douglas MacArthur was leading Asian forces, a ragtag China was able to force a stalemate in the Korean war. Since then China has grown way stronger and US leaders are not as decisive as Eisenhower.
In today's context, both China and Russia could hold off against the US. How many such hostile empires could match British empire of the 19th century or Mongols of the 13th century? Power is relative. Some Americans seem too convinced of America's superpower. Putin and Li disagree, and so do many other world leaders. Power is perception.
A dictator in Cuba (a few miles off US) could easily middle-finger the US for decades. Try doing this to the great Khan.
What is the ground reality for the US? Russia could easily run over an US ally and annex Crimea. All the US President could do was fume. Syria could bomb civilians, Iran could acquire nuclear bombs, Talibans could resurface, North Koreans would joke at US restrictions and anti-American governments all over the world could rise. Could anyone have done this against the Mongols under Genghiz Khan or even the British empire at its heights?
Power is not the mere possession of toys. Power is not the mere ownership of big boats all over the world's oceans. Power is the ability to influence (how many times was US able to convince the UN to do anything). Power is the ability to project and protect your interest. Whether it is Somali pirates or Afghan terrorists or Iranian mullahs, US is often tripped even by the weakest nations.
Not just now. Even under Eisenhower (when US was its peak) and when Douglas MacArthur was leading Asian forces, a ragtag China was able to force a stalemate in the Korean war. Since then China has grown way stronger and US leaders are not as decisive as Eisenhower.
In today's context, both China and Russia could hold off against the US. How many such hostile empires could match British empire of the 19th century or Mongols of the 13th century? Power is relative. Some Americans seem too convinced of America's superpower. Putin and Li disagree, and so do many other world leaders. Power is perception.
A dictator in Cuba (a few miles off US) could easily middle-finger the US for decades. Try doing this to the great Khan.
No comments:
Post a Comment