Turbulent Peace: The United States Role in a Dynamic World

Abstract

Conclusions * Global conflicts are unlikely in the near future because rivalries among the great powers have been reduced and the great powers have less need to become involved in peripheral states. * The current, if uneasy, harmony that exists among the great powers was fostered by the collapse of communism as a militant ideology, by the emergence of economics as a primary emphasis of governments, by nuclear weapons, which made war exceedingly dangerous, and by the spread of democracy. * Democratic great powers favor the tranquility of the post-Cold War era and they are unlikely to seek dramatic change. One development that could change the status quo is European political unity, which would almost inevitably exclude Russia; however, such unity is unlikely in the near term. * Russia and China, the great powers that are not fully or irrevocably democracies, are the great post-Cold War question marks. Political uncertainty and the continuing vibrancy of nationalism, combined with irredentist claims, mean that the need to rally political support at home can lead to assertive international rhetoric and action. * Conflicts within and between peripheral states are the source of most turbulence in today's world. Most of these conflicts have little real importance to the great powers. However, nuclear proliferation among peripheral states is a source of instability the great powers cannot overlook. A Time of Comparative Peace The post-Cold War era, although scarcely free of violence, is freer of the danger of a world war than any other time in modern history. For this there are two reasons. First, at present the traditional great power rivalries that have given rise to great wars do not exist. The international system is more peaceful than ever before at its core, centering on the five great powers: the United States, Western Europe, Japan, China, and Russia. A second reason for this unprecedented peace is an historically unusual disjunction between the core--the major powers--on the one hand, and the periphery--everyone and every place else--on the other. The reasons for the unusual harmony among the major powers are familiar, but bear repeating. First is the collapse of communism as a militant ideology stressing the inevitability of international struggle. A second reason is the primacy of economics--virtually all core governments emphasize domestic economic growth. Moreover, the rise of the market as the principal method for organizing economic activity within, between, and among most countries has promoted international harmony. According to market principles, the control of territory is not the key to wealth, which comes instead from participation in the international division of labor. Insofar as this principle is accepted by sovereign states, one of the major incentives for war disappears. Yet a third reason for post-Cold War tranquillity, carried over from the Cold War period, is the presence of nuclear weapons. They make war exceedingly dangerous, and thus dampen the incentives for conflict. Fourth, two principles espoused by Woodrow Wilson after World War I are coming into their own eight decades later. The first is the principle that the basis for organizing sovereign states should be national self-determination. This principle does not always ensure peace. Struggles for national self-determination have often been bloody. Indeed, most of the wars in the world today are being fought over some version of this issue. However, where the national self-determination principle coincides with the borders of sovereign states, the result is usually a certain measure of stability. The second Wilsonian principle is the spread of democracy. Wilson believed democracies were less inclined to disturb the peace and commit aggression against their neighbors than undemocratic countries. In general, with some qualifications, this is true, and it is also true that democracy is more widespread in the post-Cold War era than ever before. …