Reviving Cold War Memory Would Do No One Any Good
The U.S.-Russian brawl over Washington’s missile defense program is evoking Cold War memories among most middle-aged people. Those in their 40s and 50s, who grew up watching the escalating arms race between the then two superpowers, heaved a sigh of relief upon the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the Socialist bloc in the late 1980s. So few would be nostalgic for the Russo-American confrontation of decades ago. The reality seems to be going in the opposite direction, though.
Washington says its missile defense (MD) program is aimed at protecting its allies and U.S. armed forces from the threats of rogue states with missile-launching capability, such as Iran and North Korea. Russia, and to a lesser extent China, however, may think these are just excuses for encircling them by installing missile-intercepting facilities in East Europe and Japan. In short, America’s rivals are thinking Washington is exploiting an imaginary threat to check potential challengers. They may not be entirely wrong to think so.
Of course, the U.S. fears about danger posed by these rogue states are not completely groundless particularly since 9/11. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s seemingly overreaction is also in part due to his domestic needs, such as calming internal dissent over delayed democratization, as well as diplomatic conflicts over Iran and Kosovo. The fundamental reason for the latest confrontation, however, is Russia, armed with oil dollars and internal stability, is no longer the ``toothless bear’’ of the past two decades.
The world also has long suspected that the MD, a much scaled-down version of the ``Star Wars’’ project initiated by former U.S. President Ronald Reagan in 1983, is just another U.S. military-industry project. So the two global leaders are reviving their old rivalry mainly because of their respective domestic situations, while citing global security as an excuse and threatening the security of smaller allies in the process. If their war-of-nerves escalates to real action, the entire world could be in danger.
The United States should take first responsibility for aggravating the situation. Washington’s foreign policy, based on its desire to maintain its status as the sole superpower with military dominance, could trigger an arms buildup among its potential rivals. Some U.S. commentators say countries should not be overly concerned about the still incomplete and flawed system. This is a ridiculous way of dissuading foreigners, like telling them they should wait until the completion of the scheme.
President Bush recently said, ``The United States was born with an apparent destiny of realizing God’s principles in this world.’’ By all appearances, he seems to believe in this ``apparent destiny’’ too much.