Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s 11-day trip to Africa, which came less than a month after President Barack Obama’s visit to Egypt and Ghana in July, was an attempt to emphasize Africa’s importance to the United States. Clinton was supposed to reassure African leaders that the Obama administration intends to engage with the continent, despite wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and perennial problems in Israel and the Korean peninsula.
Tibetan monks at the main temple on the 50th anniversary of their exile. Photo by Saransh Sehgal.
The United States has basically thrown up its hands in the current crisis with North Korea. Washington has mounted an aggressive campaign at the UN to further isolate the world’s noisiest nuclear aspirant. But no one thinks that UN actions will have much effort.
Future historians will view the Bush administration’s assertion of unilateral U.S. power and authority as the last gasp of the American empire. The imperial overstretch that historian Paul Kennedy diagnosed near the end of the Cold War is finally hitting us: the banking crisis, the recession, the costs of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the ever-increasing Pentagon budget.
This essay is part of a strategic dialogue on North Korea that includes this article by John Feffer. The authors respond to each other here.
Will China be the "growth pole" that will snatch the world from the jaws of depression?
The Bush administration transformed the way the United States dealt with the world.
North Korea’s recent rocket launch received few congratulations and many condemnations, including the recent UN censure. Although Pyongyang did not manage to put a satellite into orbit, it did succeed in getting the world’s attention. It has sustained this attention by kicking out nuclear inspectors, vowing to restart its plutonium processing program, and declaring an end to its participation in the six-party talks.
In 1919, the English geographer Halford Mackinder argued that control of the “Eurasian heartland” was the key to world domination. Mackinder believed that Eastern Europe was the gateway to controlling this huge landmass stretching from his home country to the far shores of Asia. And indeed, Eastern Europe proved pivotal in the next conflagration, World War II, as well as in the US policy of containing the Soviet Union in the Cold War era.
“Right now seems to be a relatively quiet moment in East Asia regarding historical controversies,” observes Daqing Yang, a professor of Asian history at George Washington University and a participant in a Sep.15 seminar on historical dialogue and reconciliation sponsored by the Sasakawa Peace Foundation and the university’s Sigur Centre. “But just a few years back, heads of state canceled their summit meetings because of a visit to a particular shrine in Tokyo or because of history textbooks.”