New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a
nation's war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a
"Star Wars" defense system, has technology changed
considerably enough to make the latest Missile Defense
initiatives more successful? Can such an application of
science be successful? Is a militarized space inevitable,
necessary or impossible?
Read Debates, a new
Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published
every Thursday.
(4373 previous messages)
lchic
- 01:57pm Sep 18, 2002 EST (#
4374 of 4383)
Sustainable Empires had something to offer ... does the USA
?
________
Rome, AD ... Rome, DC?
They came, they saw, they conquered, and now the Americans
dominate the world like no nation before. But is the US really
the Roman empire of the 21st century? And if so, is it on the
rise - or heading for a fall? Jonathan Freedland sifts the
evidence
Wednesday September 18, 2002 The Guardian
The word of the hour is empire. As the United States
marches to war, no other label quite seems to capture the
scope of American power or the scale of its ambition. "Sole
superpower" is accurate enough, but seems oddly modest.
"Hyperpower" may appeal to the French; "hegemon" is favoured
by academics. But empire is the big one, the gorilla of
geopolitical designations - and suddenly America is bearing
its name.
Of course, enemies of the US have shaken their fist at its
"imperialism" for decades: they are doing it again now, as
Washington wages a global "war against terror" and braces
itself for a campaign aimed at "regime change" in a foreign,
sovereign state. What is more surprising, and much newer, is
that the notion of an American empire has suddenly become a
live debate inside the US. And not just among Europhile
liberals either, but across the range - from left to right.
Today a liberal dissenter such as Gore Vidal, who called
his most recent collection of essays on the US The Last
Empire, finds an ally in the likes of conservative columnist
Charles Krauthammer. Earlier this year Krauthammer told the
New York Times, "People are coming out of the closet on the
word 'empire'." He argued that Americans should admit the
truth and face up to their responsibilities as the undisputed
masters of the world. And it wasn't any old empire he had in
mind. "The fact is, no country has been as dominant
culturally, economically, technologically and militarily in
the history of the world since the Roman empire."
Accelerated by the post-9/11 debate on America's role in
the world, the idea of the United States as a 21st-century
Rome is gaining a foothold in the country's consciousness. The
New York Review of Books illustrated a recent piece on US
might with a drawing of George Bush togged up as a Roman
centurion, complete with shield and spears. Earlier this month
Boston's WBUR radio station titled a special on US imperial
power with the Latin tag Pax Americana. Tom Wolfe has written
that the America of today is "now the mightiest power on
earth, as omnipotent as... Rome under Julius Caesar".
But is the comparison apt? Are the Americans the new
Romans? In making a documentary film on the subject over the
past few months, I put that question to a group of people
uniquely qualified to know. Not experts on US defence strategy
or American foreign policy, but Britain's leading historians
of the ancient world. They know Rome intimately - and, without
exception, they are struck by the similarities between the
empire of now and the imperium of then.
The most obvious is overwhelming military strength. Rome
was the superpower of its day, boasting an army with the best
training, biggest budgets and finest equipment the world had
ever seen. No one else came close. The United States is just
as dominant - its defence budget will soon be bigger than the
military spending of the next nine countries put together,
allowing the US to deploy its forces almost anywhere on the
planet at lightning speed. Throw in the country's global
technological lead, and the US emerges as a power without
rival.
There is a big difference, of course. Apart from the odd
Puerto Rico or Guam, the US does not have formal colonies, the
way the Romans (or British, for that matter) always did. There
are no American consuls or viceroys directly ruling faraway
lands.
But that difference between ancient Rome and modern
Washington may be less significant than it looks. After all,
America has done p
(9 following messages)
New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
Missile Defense
|