STUDY: The Globalization Security Dilemma. How Globalization will Renew Great Power Competition.

By Enrique Portaluppi
September 02, 2008

Part V. How U.S. Preponderant Intervention Strategy affects the Globalization Security Dilemma

Washington is currently engaging its rivals in multiple "Regional Security Complexes" as Washington extends its strategy of Preponderant Intervention to meet the new challenges. 36 Washington is presently negotiating with the states of Eastern Europe and the Caucasus for the installation of a ballistic missile defense shield. 37 Washington claims that the shield is intended to defend Europe against Tehran´s newly developed Shahab 3 missile that boasts a range of 2000 km. This may be true to some extent now that Tehran has recently test fired its new missile with relative success. 38 Moscow, on the other hand is thinking otherwise as Putin has accused the U.S. of trying to "attain global dominance." 39 Moscow has stated that the proposed missile defense shield poses a strategic threat to Russian sovereignty and has warned Washington to stop negotiations with the states that border Russia to include, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Lithuania, Ukraine and Georgia. These states were chosen to host the missile shield purposefully partly due to their strategic position as they encircle Russia. Another reason would be to make certain that they do not realign themselves with Russia as they were once part of the Soviet Empire during the Cold War; however, all have recently petitioned to be a part of the new NATO, a fact that has Moscow fuming. 40

In the Central Asian "Regional Security Complex", Washington is expanding its strategy into the former Soviet republics of Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. Washington claims that the development of logistical and military installations in this region is a vital resource against the War on Terror. Moscow, Beijing and Tehran see these installations in a different light as they may in the future serve a number of U.S. strategic purposes, such as staging points for future U.S. regional conflicts. They also create barriers to entry into the region, effectively shutting out Russia and China´s hopes of ever spreading their influence into the region. 41

In the Asian "Regional Security Complex"; Washington is forging new security alliances that are intended to counterbalance China´s growing economic and military influence in the region. The newly signed India – U.S. nuclear deal provides New Delhi with technology and nuclear fuel needed to upgrade its civilian program. This deal essentially reverses the nuclear ban imposed on New Delhi due to their testing of nuclear weapons. Washington knowingly or unknowingly, is practicing Off Shore Balancing and developing a strategic partner in India intended to form a balance of power in the region as a means of curbing China´s rising power. 42 Reportedly worth $100 million, Russia and France were also interested in aligning themselves with New Delhi, but Washington saw to it that Moscow and Paris were effectively cut out of the bargain. 43

In the Middle East "Regional Security Complex"; Washington has gained an advantageous position stemming from the Iraq War as containment of Iran is further solidified. Having Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Iraq as allies, along with newly formed alliances in Central Asia and the Caucasus, the U.S. should be able to effectively cut Tehran off from the rest of the Middle East and prevent them from expanding their sphere of influence to its neighbors. 44

In the diplomatic world of international relations, adversaries almost assuredly accuse each other of instigating international security dilemmas, thus causing measures and countermeasures to be executed by opposing sides. In the case of the missile defense shield, the U.S. claims that the shield is to protect European allies endangered by rogue state ballistic missiles, while Moscow and Beijing claim that the missile defense shield is a direct threat to their security, as U.S. missiles can now target their respective nuclear forces. Moscow´s countermove is to amplify pressure on the Eastern European states by increasing the number of troops already stationed along their borders, while concurrently threatening to limit the amount of oil exportation to the adversaries. It has also prompted Moscow to consider the resumption of a strategic bomber base in Cuba, a move that directly threatens the continental U.S. along with the entire Western Hemisphere. Washington responds by backing the Ukrainian and Georgian application to integrate into the NATO alliance, a move that Moscow intensely opposes. 45 These sorts of reciprocal measures have the rest of Europe concerned as the threat of a new arms race taking place upon the European continent becomes more imminent. 46 Measures and countermeasures that occur within close proximity to each other often intensify the security dilemma as the spatial threat is measured in accordance to the threats range. 47 This seems to be especially true in the territories that encompass Russia, China and Iran as U.S. strategy has been to contain these three emerging great powers from further expanding their influence into the adjoining regions. As the Globalization Security Dilemma intensifies, Washington feels it must utilize Preponderant Intervention to curtail and counter these threats.

Full text >>>