Page 9 - The Economist Asia January 2018

Leaders The Economist January 27th 2018 9
The next war

Shifts in geopolitics and technologyare renewing the threatofgreat-powerconflict
N THE past 25 years war has that America did most to establish and guarantee. But they see
Iclaimed too many lives. Yet its pillars—universal human rights, democracy and the rule of
even as civil and religious strife law—as an imposition that excuses foreign meddling and un-
have raged in Syria, central Afri- derminestheirown legitimacy. Theyare nowrevisionist states
ca, Afghanistan and Iraq, a dev- that want to challenge the status quo and look at their regions
astating clash between the asspheresofinfluence to be dominated. ForChina, that means
world’s great powers has re- East Asia; forRussia, eastern Europe and Central Asia.
mained almost unimaginable. Neither China nor Russia wants a direct military confronta-
No longer. Last week the Pentagon issued a new national tion with America that they would surely lose. But they are us-
defence strategy that put China and Russia above jihadism as ingtheirgrowinghard powerin otherways, in particular byex-
the main threat to America. This week the chief of Britain’s ploitinga “greyzone” where aggression and coercion workjust
general staff warned of a Russian attack. Even now America below the level that would risk military confrontation with
and North Korea are perilously close to a conflict that risks the West. In Ukraine Russia has blended force, misinforma-
draggingin China orescalatinginto nuclearcatastrophe. tion, infiltration, cyberwar and economic blackmail in ways
As our special report this weekon the future ofwar argues, that democratic societies cannot copy and find hard to rebuff.
powerful, long-term shifts in geopolitics and the proliferation China is more cautious, but it has claimed, occupied and garri-
of new technologies are eroding the extraordinary military soned reefs and shoals in disputed waters.
dominance that America and its allies have enjoyed. Conflict China and Russia have harnessed military technologies in-
on a scale and intensity notseen since the second world waris vented by America, such as long-range precision-strike and
once again plausible. The world is not prepared. electromagnetic-spectrum warfare, to raise the cost of inter-
vention against them dramatically. Both have used asymmet-
The pityofwar ric-warfare strategies to create “anti-access/area denial” net-
The pressing danger is of war on the Korean peninsula, per- works. China aims to push American naval forces far out into
haps this year. Donald Trump has vowed to prevent Kim Jong the Pacific where they can no longer safely project power into
Un, North Korea’s leader, from being able to strike America the East and South China Seas. Russia wants the world to
with nuclear-armed ballistic missiles, a capability that recent knowthat, from the Arcticto the BlackSea, itcan call on greater
tests suggest he may have within months, if not already. firepowerthan its foes—and that it will not hesitate to do so.
Among many contingency plans, the Pentagon is considering If America allows China and Russia to establish regional
a disablingpre-emptive strike againstthe North’snuclearsites. hegemonies, either consciously or because its politics are too
Despite low confidence in the success of such a strike, it must dysfunctional to muster a response, it will have given them a
be prepared to carryoutthe president’sordershould he give it. green light to pursue their interests by brute force. When that
Even a limited attack could trigger all-out war. Analysts was last tried, the result was the first world war.
reckon that North Korean artillery can bombard Seoul, the Nuclear weapons, largely a source of stability since 1945,
South Korean capital, with 10,000 rounds a minute. Drones, may add to the danger. Their command-and-control systems
midget submarines and tunnelling commandos could deploy are becomingvulnerable to hackingbynewcyber-weapons or
biological, chemical and even nuclear weapons. Tens of thou- “blinding” of the satellites they depend on. A country under
sands ofpeople would perish; many more ifnukes were used. such an attack could find itself under pressure to choose be-
Thisnewspaperhasargued thatthe prospectofsuch horror tween losingcontrol ofits nuclearweapons orusingthem.
means that, if diplomacy fails, North Korea should be con-
tained and deterred instead. Although we stand by our argu- Vain citadels
ment, war is a real possibility (see page 17). Mr Trump and his Whatshould America do? Almost20 yearsofstrategicdrift has
advisers may conclude that a nuclear North would be so reck- played into the hands of Russia and China. George W. Bush’s
less, and so likely to cause nuclearproliferation, that it is better unsuccessful wars were a distraction and sapped support at
to riskwaron the Korean peninsula todaythan a nuclear strike home for America’s global role. Barack Obama pursued a for-
on an American city tomorrow. eign policy of retrenchment, and was openly sceptical about
Even if China stays out of a second Korean war, both it and the value of hard power. Today, Mr Trump says he wants to
Russia are entering into a renewal of great-power competition make America great again, but is going about it in exactly the
with the West. Their ambitions will be even harder to deal wrong way. He shuns multilateral organisations, treats alli-
with than North Korea’s. Three decadesofunprecedented eco- ances as unwanted baggage and openly admires the authori-
nomic growth have provided China with the wealth to trans- tarian leaders of America’s adversaries. It is as if Mr Trump
form its armed forces, and given its leaders the sense that their wants America to give up defending the system it created and
moment has come. Russia, paradoxically, needs to assert itself to join Russia and China as just another truculent revisionist
now because it is in long-term decline. Its leaders have spent powerinstead.
heavily to restore Russia’s hard power, and they are willing to America needs to accept that it is a prime beneficiary ofthe
take risks to prove they deserve respect and a seat at the table. international system and that it is the only power with the
Both countries have benefited from the international order ability and the resources to protect it from sustained attack. 1