Introduction
The End of the Cold War– the End of Russia as a superpower, also
The United States a superpower?
Future Concepts of a possible World Order:
US Hegemony
The Three-Bloc System
A Multi-Layer Concept
Superpower US in Worldwide Media
Superpower and the Internet
Conclusion
Literature, citations and further readings
Introducing our Seminar - Paper
In this paper we tried to give an overview of tendencies of world politics from the end of the Cold War until today. To deal with such a long and complex period of time we had to make a distinguished selection of what to deal with. We for example could only tangibly cover Multilateral Institutions. Very interesting would have been a closer examination of the Cold War itself, the relationship between the US and the NATO, latest developments in the European Union - but this would fill hundreds and hundreds of pages.
Our great emphasis was on the internet and articles published in the Net.
This was the first so called "internet paper" we have ever written. It was very time consuming but a great experience. We think it is very useful to learn how to operate with and in the internet. Because internet competence is very useful in today's world and will be even more so tomorrow.
Special thanks to Erwin Giedenbacher for his internet know-how and Prof. Wagnleitner for his support.
I. The End of the Cold War
I.a. The End of Russia as a superpower
Since the end of the World War II. the political map was altered by great changes. Most significant for the whole global system certainly were the End of the Cold War, the opening of the East and the Reunification of Germany. These changes are reflected in the roles, capabilities and policies of Western Europe and the United States.
In 1989 the end of the Cold War was proclaimed by policy makers in the Soviet Union and the United States. But what was the Cold War?
The Cold War period is best defined as a period of
"competition, hostility, and tension between the Western powers
and communist bloc states. While frequently intense, it never escalated
into direct and open warfare between the bloc leaders - the Soviet Union
and the United States. No single issue or geographic area dominated
the conflict. At any point in time, the U.S.-Soviet cold war interactions
were characterized by some combination of political maneuvering, diplomatic
wrangling, psychological warfare, ideological competition, economic coercion,
arms races, and proxy wars." (taken from: Hastedt, p. 44 - 45)
Major competition areas according to this definition are: economy and ideology. Where the fighting of Communism seems to be only an excuse to declare Soviet Russia enemy number one, hostility because of economical competition seems to be far more reasonable. Very interesting is also the question, who was responsible for the climate of Cold War. The classical approach toward responsibility derivation, is, that the Soviet Union was the aggressor and the US only the reactor.
From a revisionist point of view, the Soviet Union's military power has always been overestimated, as well as the USSR's expansion plans.
"Subject to even more disagreement [...] is who, if anyone
was responsible for it. According to the orthodox interpretation,
responsibility for cold war is placed in the Soviet Union.
The United States is pictured as basically reacting to and trying
to check Soviet outward thrusts. Where advocates of the orthodox
view see a constant pattern of Soviet expansion combined with
an inflexible and Messianic ideology, the revisionists see an insecure
and week Soviet Union. In their view, the United States is primarily
responsible for the cold war. Its misreading Soviet goals (which are
held by revisionists to be fundamentally defensive in nature),
exaggeration of Soviet military power, and obsession with communism
combined to produce a series of policies that left the Soviet Union no
choice but to act unilaterally in protecting its national interest."
(taken from: Hastedt, p.51)
Only two years after the official end of the cold war, in 1991, the Soviet Union ceased to exist and with it the biggest territorial state of the world. What was left behind was a big question mark on global maps because nobody knew which direction the former Soviet Union was about to take. But also the condition of world politics was transformed. The unquestioning dominance of the Soviet Union suddenly was put into question. During the ages of the Cold War the structure of the world was bipolar, centered around the United States and the Soviet Union. The United States seems to have lost its counterpart.
"In December of 1991, as the world watched in amazement, the Soviet Union
disintegrated into fifteen separate countries. Its collapse was hailed by the
West as a victory for freedom, a triumph over totalitarianism, and evidence
of the superiority of capitalism over socialism. The United States rejoiced as
its formidable enemy was brought to its knees, thereby ending the Cold War
which had hovered over these two superpowers since the end of
World War Two." (taken from: Cold War)
On the one hand Russia still has a vast amount of nuclear weapons. Russia is still one of the biggest territories on the globe, is the world's largest oil producer and has a vast amount of natural resources as well as a large educated population. It lies in the heart of Eurasia and is the gate from Europe to the East. But the End of the Cold War also made clear, that Soviet Union power had been overestimated, and that the country itself suffered great economy problems. In the year 1985, when Mikhail Gorbachev came to power, there were only 50 000 personal computers in the Soviet Union, whereas in the same year, the United States had more than 30 million personal computers. (taken from: New York Times)
Soviet economist Nikolai Schmelkov furthermore reports, that 92 percent of the Soviet Union's industry is below world standard. (taken from: Schmelko, p.12)
These conditions that remind of a third world country, make it nearly impossible for Russia to remain a superpower.
"Now that the Soviet Union, with its centralized political and economic system,
has ceased to exist, the fifteen newly formed independent countries, which emerged
in its aftermath are faced with an overwhelming task. They must develop their economies,
reorganize their political system, and, in many cases, settle bitter territorial disputes.
A number of wars have developed on the peripheries of the former Soviet Union.
Additionally, the entire region is suffering a period of severe economic hardship.
However, despite the many hardships facing the region, bold steps are being taken
toward democratization, reorganization, and rebuilding in most of the countries of
the former Soviet Union." (taken from: Cold War)
But not only Russia's role as the second superpower in the two-bloc system changed, but also its relationship towards Europe was altered. When during the Cold War Europe was Russia's and the United States' center of interest, it seems to have lost their attention. American strategic and military theories concerning Europe as the gate to number one enemy, the Soviet Union, have diminished and play a minor role. The US today is much more interested in regional politics and focuses on countries that have gained importance through economy.
I.b. The United States as a superpower?
(caricature of Uncle Sam over-viewing the globe)
Generally speaking one could describe a superpower as a country dominating and influencing the world in most of the following aspect: + world politics
+ military forces
+ economy
+ ideology
During and after the Second World War, only two nations, namely the US and USSR, have been internationally recognized as the only superpowers of the world. At Cold War times, theses two nations greatly influenced the globe through their economy, military forces, finances and ideology. Up to the 80s, it was the bipolarity of the Cold War, that deterred the US from interfering in world affairs too harshly. It was the constant threat of the thermonuclear war, that kept a balance of power. This system of bipolarity was not just, but stable. The decline of Russia and Soviet loss of superpower status is discussed in detail in the former chapter.
Nowadays US critics claim, that "US leaders have been possessed by what can be described as the 'sole superpower syndrome' - a sense of nearly godlike power, derived from the absence of any balancing forces in the international system". (taken from: Michael Klare)
To prove that the US is the only recognized superpower today the Royal College of Defense Studies created a matrix which allowed a comparison of the major strengths of individual countries (eg. In political, military, economic and financial areas).
According to this matrix, Russia compared to the US, holds on to military power and is week and unstable in political, economic and financial areas.
"The matrix [...] supported the status of the US as the only superpower today." (taken from: Royal College of Defense Studies)
Another expert Dan Hiester stresses US extraordinary position as a world superpower.
"Since 1945, the only true global power has been the United Stated,
based on all aspects of influence, not just military. While its position
is certainly more constrained that it once was, it still has and will
continue to play a unique international role. No other country,
or group of countries, certainly not Japan or the European Community,
would have the international political credibility to replace the
United States' role, leaving on one side the question of
economic and military might."(taken from: Dan Hiester)
Bare in mind that Dan Hiester's article was published in 1991, since then global power relations have changed. Europe, namely the European Union, has established itself as an influential power in many fields.
The United States and the United Nations
US power is not only possible because of nuclear strength or military power, it is also the lack of an equal counterpart and the failure and inefficiency of the United Nations, that helps to create an American superpower status. The UN was founded in order to secure international political order as well as "World Peace". Quoting the harsh critic Noam Chomsky in his speech, delivered on September 22nd, 1998, at the University of Calgary, Chomsky claims, that the UN simply is unable to cope with specific world problems because they are not given enough power.
"Now of course, there is no enforcement mechanism - this has
to be by acceptance. There is in fact an enforcement mechanism,
namely the great powers, and to be realistic, exactly one of them,
namely the United States, so that's the enforcement mechanism.
But that suffices to show that the whole system is null and void
because the United States rejects the principles out of hand. It
rejects them both in practice and in fact in doctrine. There's no
need to waste time on the practice in the past half century;
the bombing of a pharmaceutical plant in the Sudan a couple
of weeks ago is a recent illustration but one that is completely
trivial in historical context, though I suppose that terrorist destruction
of half of the medical supplies and fertilizers in the United States
might be taken a shade more seriously." (taken from: Chomsky)
Furthermore he asserts, that since the Reagan administration, the famous Article 51 (which says that nothing in the UN Charter abrogates the right of self-defense against armed attack until the UN - Security Council acts), was reinterpreted by the US to justify its repeated reliance on force.
"It has held that Article 51, I'm quoting actually, authorizes self-defense against future attack. Article 51 permits the United States to defend its interests."(taken from: Chomsky)
He concludes, that the US respects the United Nations and its Charter when they serve as an instrument to fulfill their own interests. Otherwise the decisions and condemnations are ignored and not obeyed.
"Instead of exercising the patience of collaborate with other countries about creative and nonviolent resolutions to conflict, the temptation seems overpowering to impose American will through military might and economic embargoes. The result can only be a growing resentment of the United States and a breakdown in international dialogue, the life blood of diplomacy." (taken from Mennonite Central Committee)
Especially critics from Third World countries warn that the US is becoming more and more powerful. US actions may sometimes be convenient for Western countries but often to the disadvantage of Third World states.
The US justify their interventions claiming act in the name of Human Rights and democracy but when it comes to the point, they very freely disregard international rules and ignore UN resolutions.
"It was all formulated rather straightforwardly by Ambassador Albright, now Secretary of State, when she informed the UN Security Council which was then refusing to along with some US demands about Iraq...she informed the Security Council that the United Stated will act 'multilaterally when we can, unilaterally when we must in an area important for our interests.'" (taken from: Chomsky)
Another interesting book about the US's relationship with the United Nations and other organizations is "The United States and Multilateral Institutions" by M. Karns and K. Mingst.
"The United States has clearly found UNESCO, FAO (food and Agriculture Organization), the UN human rights organs, the OAS (Organization of American States), and the UN less useful for regime and rule creation and for collective legitimation of its policies and interests. The UN was primarily useful during the height of the cold war and the process of decolonization"(taken from: Forsythe, David)
The US nowadays still supports the United Nations in actions if it benefits and fulfills personal strategy. The US acts unilaterally if the United Nations do not support ist policy ,whenever US interests are endangered.
"Many unilateral US actions come at a time when the United States seems to display an increased disregard for the United Nations- the one international government body with some potential for holding the sole superpower accountable." (taken from: Mennonite Central Committee)
The United Nations are still to weak to control world politics and secure justice. Furthermore it is highly influenced by the United States and cannot be seen objective world police.
The US and the rising superpower China
In recent literature, it is especially China, that is mentioned, when it comes to 21st century world superpower. While it was unmentioned a couple of years ago, China has become the USSR's successor as a possible counterpart of the US.