Kagan challenges liberal internationalism in his recent book “The Return Of History And The End Of Dreams“
Deudney argues that we don’t necessarily need to get back into 19th century power games, and instead need to build on the institutions that exist, despite their flaws. We shouldn’t undermine China and Russia’s autonomy (Chechnya and Taiwan). We need to be smarter about it. He argues:
1. There are now a dense network of international institutions that have sprung up from liberal democracies…that simply didn’t exist in the world 19th century European states.
2. Nuclear weapons have made deployment of troops to solve conflicts (as in 19th century Europe) much riskier. They’ve changed the game and now’s there’s an incentive for large statesnot to go to war with each other for fear of annihilation, and also to work together to make sure non-state actors (any rogue group) doesn’t get nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. Also, on a smaller scale (Vietnam), with technological advancements (Kalishnikofs), it’s harder to go subdue territories to grow your empire. You can’t play Risk anymore, or not with the same expectations.
3. International trade has made autocratic states (China) more interdependent upon everyone else (and vice-versa). I’m presuming that this would off-set their more nationalistic and militaristic aims to some extent.
Any thoughts and comments are welcome. Feel free to highlight my ignorance.
Also On This Site: Repost: Daniel Deudney on Bloggingheads
From Foreign Affairs: ‘The Geography Of Chinese Power’
From The American Interest Online: Francis Fukuyama On Samuel Huntington