Quote:
Originally Posted by CCIP
Well, not America's, really. I think this is more telling about where the "hot spot" for the driving forces of history is going to be in the next while.
Which isn't surprising, really. America and Europe made history when their economies were exploding, or when their skeletons came out of the closet in a big way that affected everyone. Now that's going on in a different part of the world.
|
Indeed, and sorry for editting the above in which I agree with you, sometimes I prefer to do that rather than make a new post directly after mine, but it can get a little confusing.
I maintain that the early 21st century will contain much of the same elements as that of the early 20th, and indeed that of the late 19th.
It is interesting that Afghanistan should be the focal point of events for the major powers of the world in the first years of this century when it has the infamous nickname of 'The graveyard of empires', certainly there must have been plenty of historians in the UK that grimiced at the irony that a hundred years after we left Afghanistan we were going back in again, making the same mistakes we made last time we were there, and suffering for it.
In Russia they called the Great Game the 'Tournament of Shadows' and perhaps that's a more accurate name for it as it never involved two major powers directly fighting each other, but rather who could influence certain key states, the most infamous of which, was Afghanistan, a nation between Britains India and Russias Samarkand, Tashkent and Bukhara, it was seen as a pivotal point of control between Russia and Britain, if Russia controlled it, then it could push its way south and threaten India, if Britain controlled it then it halted the Russian advance and kept India under British control.
Thankfully, eventually, we both united against the Germans and the Great Game was largely forgotten aside from a few brief scurries after the formation of the Soviet Union.
This new Great Game is focused primarily on resources rather than borders, certainly America is not out to create some Raj or become an Empire and such thoughts and accusations are ludicrous. What it does need though are resources to feed its economy, and so does China. So what we are coming to, and I believe are taking the first steps into, is a Second Great Game involving the Middle East, Africa and Asia. America currently holds great sway in two of these three locations, and China has spent the last decade building its influence in Africa. It will now need to look at pushing American influence out of Asia and out of the Middle East, without resorting to direct military force. To do this it will need the assistance of Russia which has sway over Central Asia and parts of the Middle East, and it will need to identify key weaknesses in American strategy in the Middle East and apply pressure to them. Romney correctly identifies Pakistan as a key player in this, Pakistan is to the US as Iran is to Russia and China, they don't see eye to eye, but co-operation is essential to further their goals.
The key area though, and where I think the middle to late 21st century will be focused is Africa, the long forgotten nation, which still contains untapped oil reserves, precious metals and other resources which have been buried under decades of civil war and dictatorships. In the late 19th century we had the 'European scramble for Africa' where most of Europe brought up Africa through money and gunpowder, and dug into it and brought back what we found to invest in our economies. Africa saw little benefit from it, and was thoroughly exploited into the 20th century before the First and Second World Wars brought an end to colonial ambitions. However, as current resource rich areas begin to dry up, the worlds major powers are going to have to look elsewhere for their goods, South America is another area which is ripe for resource gathering, but it has seen more development than Africa so there will be slightly less resources there for the taking. There will be no new colonies, or red coats fighting off swarms of Zulus, but there will certainly be greater investment in Africa, for oil, minerals and even farming as the climate shifts to make mass farming in North Africa a viable opportunity. However there will be colonialism by the back door, with multi-national companies edging in to organise resource gathering to its most efficient. This will be sold to the countries involved as 'investing in the local people' when the truth will be that all the local people will be able to do will be the grunt work...not a great step up from their position as slaves to their colonial masters. African governments will seem more stable but will be propped up by American or Chinese money and their allegiences and resources brought by companies of the relevant nations.
It's going to be softer than the colonial governing that European nations put in place, but it will still be there, and the African people will only benefit mildly from it.