The War of Americans

all over the sort of the last half-century the U. S. has enjoyed unprecedented power in every panorama whether it be politically, economically, militarily, or by any other means. In its controller of world politics since WWII, the U. S. has been able to cast its influence nearly the globe. However, the U. S. experient a gradual decline in its sovereignty over the course of this era as well. A prime example was in 1973 when OPEC raise rock oil prices drastically over the course of the next two years.OPECs ability to increase at will the world price of its unprecedented product highlighted the industrial worlds dependence on exotic sources of energy. (Keylor, p. 346) Being a sovereign dry land requires not being quash to external forces, being able to conduct an independent foreign policy, and being able to control events within your own borders. To mean solar day, U. S. sovereignty continues to decline for a number of reasons. The only question is whether it is healthy or harmful for the U. S. to do so. The first reason why U. S. sovereignty is declining is due to what is known as interdependence. This phenomenon developed after WWII with the creation of the UN, GATT, the IMF and other such inter giving medicational organizations.All of these served to wee linkages between the major nations of the world in the postwar era. Membership in such organizations makes the U. S. subject to international law. Rosecrances identification of the trading severalize signifies the shift away from geopolitical influence and towards a global economy. both the roles of international trade and foreign investment have increasingly conk a greater element of U. S. economic importance. Additionally, the tying together of economies from around the world has lead to an increase in economic war remotee.The increase character of economic sanctions and other such measures basis be contributed to their perceived persuasiveness in obtaining foreign policy goals. The U. S. integration into the world economy leaves it nonresistant to the economic decisions of its trading partners and providers of raw materials. Reliance on import and trade goods is an essential part of the U. S. economy. This can be seen in every day life. Just think about how much gas prices have increase recently as the result of a few nations restricting their oil supplies in order to raise prices.While the countries responsible for this could all be readily defeated by the U. S. in war, the U. S. is powerless to combat their practices. divagation from its place in the world market, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction also serves to limit point the sovereignty of the U. S. First off, new nuclear powers, which would likely include a number of aggressive authoritarian states, will lack the resources to manage the boom command and control capabilities required.Even if hostile countries somehow catch up in an weaponry race, their military organizations and cultures are unlikely to catch up in the competence race for management, technology assimilation, and combat command skills. (Betts, p. 29) In addition to proliferation of nuclear weapons, there is also wide concern among U. S. leading about the spread and development of biologic weapons. The rise of religious patriotism and anti-U. S. sentiments in nations such as Iraq give manage for concern to the U. S. that an sharpshoot using biological weapons is possible. One simple fact should worry Americans more(prenominal) about biological than about nuclear or chemical arms unlike either of the other two, biological weapons combine maximum destructiveness and unaccented availability. (Betts, p. 32)Even more threatening to U. S. sovereignty is the treat of terrorist attack to our nations soil. The proliferation of the aforementi nonpareild weapons is worrisome to U. S. officials that a horrendous nuclear of biological terrorist attack is feasible. The possibility of such and attack places a se rious halt on the U. S. ability to protect its citizens within its borders. Conspirators of such an attack could be based within the U. S. or abroad, which makes it increasingly difficult to guard against. Additionally, it is unattainable to deter such a course of action.When a nation is attacked, the government behind the attack is readily identified and a counterattack can be undertaken. However, when it is unknown as to who is behind the attack, it makes it impossible to deter it from occurring since requital requires knowledge of who has launched an attack and the address at which they reside. (Betts, p. 34) Such concerns have increased since the end of the Cold War as there is widespread distrust surrounding the degree of control Russia used in disposing of their nuclear weapons.The info revolution also poses a serious threat to U. S. overeignty. The increasing opportunities for interaction through technological advances in communications and transportation make learnin g more readily accessible. The strong reliance on the behalf of the U. S. on learning infrastructure makes it vulnerable to attack. (Wriston, p. 179) The smallest nation, terrorist group, or drug cartel could hire a computer programmer to plant a Trojan horse computer virus in software, take down a vital network, or cause a missile to misfire The United States increasing reliance on massive networks may make it more, not less vulnerable. (Wriston, p. 80)As with the job of an armed terrorist attack, it is extremely difficult to determine who is responsible for a fracture of a private, supposedly secure, U. S. government web page. Fortunately, we have not tho witnessed any such form of information warfare however, imagining the form it mogul take and protecting against it has become the preoccupation of a presidential centering and numerous task forces. (Wriston, p. 179) Despite the erosion of U. S. sovereignty, it is still by far the most powerful nation in the world today.I f or one would welcome the erosion of U. S. overeignty since it furthers interdependence in world politics and serves to bear on world peace. The greater the economies of the world are intertwined, the less likely it is that a nation will go to war with another that it is linked to by a web of transnational relationships. It may also be in the best interests of the U. S. to lose some of its sovereignty since the world is moving towards civilizational entities (Western, African, Islamic, etc. ) as identified by Samuel Huntington. (Huntington) If he is correct in his prediction, and so the U. S. is better off belonging to one of these civilizations rather than standing alone.