Urvi Bhuwania 12: What the Crisis in Ukraine Means for the US Hegemony
What the Crisis in Ukraine Means for the US Hegemony
Since the Cold War, the United States has taken it upon itself to become the "guarantor of security" and the country that would not only serve as the role model for democracy but also help other countries maintain peace and democratic values (Guyer). There was a short period of time where the United States was seen as all powerful and Americans got used to the idea that the United States could be consistently successful in influencing and "fixing" other states, especially in Europe. However, the global perception of America as an all encompassing hegemon has been on a decline for decades now. From the United State's superfluous war with Iraq and failure to fend off the Taliban in Afghanistan, experts are questioning the status of the United States' power and how the Ukraine crisis may affect it.
There have been some contentions that the United States purposefully incited the Russia invasion to gain an opportunity to reassert its dominance. Regardless of the legitimacy of such claims though, it is clear that the United States is currently in a compromising position. The country that harbors such inordinate power has so far been unable to hold back the progression of Russia in Ukraine. Hundreds of millions of dollars worth of weapon shipments are going predominantly into completely untrained hands and sanctions placed on Russia seem immensely "unlikely to alter the shape of Russian President Vladimir Putin's aggression" (Guyer). Even with the sanctions causing various companies in Russia to contemplate relocating, it is not proving to be a nearly strong enough measure to prove the United State's efficient handling of the crisis.
Putin's threats of using Russia's numerous nuclear warheads against countries should the United States and NATO decide to pursue direct intervention in Russia's battle with Ukraine just further highlights the failure of America and the other members of NATO to effectively reduce the number and threat of nukes. A nuclear war today with the current technology would wreak devastation on an unimaginable scale. Just one bomb has so much catastrophic potential that it is nearly impossible to find a suitable power dynamic between such incredibly powerful countries and volatile leaders.
This is no longer a game of numbers where the country with the most troops, money, and weapons will prevail. No militia right now, even that of the supposed eminent power today, is the solution to ease this crisis, and future similar crises. The United States militia can only effect so much attention if just one nuke, which Russia has more than enough of, can cause the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocents and lead to worldwide devastation. The reassurance of mutually assured destruction seems to be the only hope. The power lies now in mind games.
Source: https://www.vox.com/22951264/russia-ukraine-war-american-superpower-limits
This blog post gives me flashbacks to AP European History last year with the discussion of a "hegemon" and America's need for an enemy. Honestly, I do agree that nuclear war will be horrific if any country decides to open that door. People always tell me that countries will not resort to nuclear because it will basically be a suicide killing, but honestly I can see a few leaders taking that risk and killing our planet and every being in it just for their ego and whatever else drives them. Hopefully World War III can be terminated, and we can all be safe, happy, and not in constant fear for our lives!
ReplyDeleteHi Urvi, your blog reminded me that countries with equal strength and the ability to cause damage have to focus on their negotiations as they cannot solely rely on military might. Learning about the world wars in history class has shown me that with each decade the threat of war can have significantly more devastating effects on the world. That the dominance of an army’s personnel cannot win in combat against a nuke. But this makes me wonder, how can we stop Russian aggression to Ukraine without devastating our planet?
ReplyDeleteHi Urvi! I like how this blog not only addresses the issue in Ukraine, but also the persisting issue of the US feeling the need to assert dominance. I fear that this pride might bring our country into another war. As you mentioned, the new technological developments may lead us to a nuclear war, which would be much more devastating. Our current situation is quite concerning and the power certain people hold in making decisions can greatly impact the outcome of our country.
ReplyDeleteHi Urvi! I particularly like this blog because you were able to tie the concept of power into an issue persisting in this world right now. Everything that the United States is doing right now is pointing to a war more and more with every action we take. Why do we feel the need to assert our 'dominance?' Yes, it may scare other countries, but is it really worth it? If we don't start to think before all the actions are made, it could lead to several million casualties in another possible World War.
ReplyDeleteHi Urvi, it's interesting to see how the most powerful countries in the world—the US, UK, Germany, etc.—are unable to adequately respond to global issues like the Ukrainian invasion due to alliances and the potential for nuclear fallout. The risk for nuclear war is so high that the world is in its longest period of global peace since the Cold War. A nuclear weapon, designed for the mass murder and destruction of human civilization, is also a force for good (for now).
ReplyDeleteHi Urvi,
ReplyDeleteMaybe we are reaching a point where military forces have advanced beyond what is necessary. The future could involve mass weapons of destruction obliterating entire countries or the absolution of all military might for communication and peace garnering. Unfortunately, it is easy to use mass weapons of destruction and justify it amidst a court of law, but it is not as easy to discuss peace when there isn't a court of humanity to consult with. Ultimately, those with the most political or economic power will be making the decisions for everyone else. As they may not be looking for a utilitarian solution, personal incentives begin to play a greater role in most diplomatic conflicts.
Hi Urvi! The US alone has the power to destroy the entire world. If we were to get involved, knowing that both sides are in possession of nuclear weapons, hopefully neither would resort to using them. The result would be devastating and both countries would suffer with damages and unimaginable deaths. This is very different from the battle of arms in WWI.
ReplyDeleteHi Urvi! Your blogs are always informative and incredibly well-researched, which I applaud you for. For the past years, the decline of the US Military's "protector of the world" status has become especially apparent. In their failures in war to their ineffectiveness in handling the Ukraine-Russia crisis, it is honestly disappointing to see the United States' inability to fulfill their "guardian of democracy" claims. And you bring a good point: much of this stems from the threat of nuclear warfare always hanging above the military's heads. Certainly Russia has that card, that threat keeps the US out of the war. But still, even though it brings peace as no one is willing to risk it, I wonder how the US will go about various military crises and problems in the future.
ReplyDeleteHi Urvi, I think the danger of a nuclear war has so far stopped many countries from getting too involved with Russia and their invasion of Ukraine, but it makes me wonder what will happen when more countries do step in. At this point, a third World War would definitely have devastating impacts on the entire planet, and it is frightening to know that such obliterating destruction is actually possible. You also bring up an interesting point about America's need to show dominance. I think there have been many times in American history where poor choices were made just to prove to the world that America is strong.
ReplyDelete