Lawrence J. Korb and Stephen Cimbala cowrote an article whose title asks the question: “Has a New Cold War Already Begun?” The subtitle goes on to make this assertion: “Who prevails in the Ukraine war will determine whether international law, consensual government, and human decency will thrive and succeed.” The article was published on March 10, 2023 in The National Interest.
It is obvious that “rule of law” and “decency,”
which are invoked in the subtitle, are meant to apply to what’s now called the
“Western Democracies.” By implication, it also means that in the opinion of the
writers, most if not all of the other jurisdictions are lawless and indecent.
Can this be true or has there been a reversal in the supposed account of the reality
that’s unfolding at this time?
To argue their point, Korb and Cimbala begin the
discussion by offering the following account of history as to what has
transpired up to now. It is here reproduced in condensed form:
“During the Cold
War, some anticipated a third world war that could involve a global nuclear
holocaust between Russians and Americans. A failure of deterrence between the
two sides, would have put at risk the entirety of human civilization. Ronald
Reagan then seized the moment to work with the Soviet Union. But the Russian
response to the US-led Western support of Ukraine today has increased the risk
of a broader conflict”.
The writers further claim that consensual government
prevails in a region that is now free but was once part of the
former Soviet Union. It is currently under attack, they say, by a Russia that’s
carrying on with a war which risks to destroy political legitimacy and human
rights in those countries. Korb and Cimbala go on to ascertain that the war has
attracted warriors from around the globe, who come to do battle with ideas,
economic strategies, and kinetic weapons.
The writers reveal that what concerns them most,
are the intentions of Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, and what they
speculate could be the grand design he is entertaining in his imagination for
restructuring the global order. It is that for this to happen, the Western
system of Liberal Democracy will have to be destroyed thus make room for
Putin’s concoction.
Added to these worries, are those of a rising China
that’s now forming a long term strategic alliance with Russia. Korb and Cimbala
explain that the synergy which will be generated by this coming together, will
more than compensate for the failure of the former Soviet Union to dominate the
world economically, therefore its failure to dominate militarily as well. This
was due, say the writers, to the reality that the Soviet system closed itself
to the world and stagnated in isolation.
By contrast, say Korb and Cimbala, the rulers of
China opened their country to the world. Having suffered a century of
humiliation at the hands of the Western powers, they launched the Cultural
Revolution of the 1950s during which time they filled their people with the
limitless ambition to catch up with and surpass those who suppressed them and
kept them backward. The result of this effort is that the Chinese trajectory
into the future now looks like the flawless flight of a rocket racing its way
toward the firmament of a promising new tomorrow — not only for the Chinese
themselves but also for those, like Russia’s Vladimir Putin, who now share
their vision.
But why is that project bound to succeed at a time when
the Western Powers who oppose it—tightly united as they
are in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)—seem to have
the upper hand in the war that’s unfolding in Ukraine? The answer to that
question jumps at you when you read the juxtaposed two paragraphs that follow.
They are the condensed version of excerpts lifted from the Korb and Cimbala
article. Here is the first paragraph:
“Putin sees the democratic West as offering to the
world a decadent set of political and moral guidelines and guardrails. China
has developed strategic dependencies on Beijing via the Belt and Road
Initiative to the control of global infrastructure. Russia’s war against
Ukraine is supported by Iran and North Korea. Their leaders, like all
autocracies and authoritarian regimes, when challenged by dissident forces
within their own societies, place blame for their failures on foreign
influence”.
As to you, my dear reader, what you need to do is focus
on the claim that when challenged by dissenting forces within their own
societies, the autocratic leaders of authoritarian regimes place blame for
their failures on foreign influence. This done, look at what Korb and Cimbala
say is happening in the so-called democracies of the West:
“Proponents of anti-democratic ideas are finding
audiences in the US and elsewhere because of the ubiquitous means of global
communication made available by modern technology. Some ‘apps’ offer seductive
political content and messaging that can divide people against one another
based on ideology, nationality, ethnicity, or other characteristics. A flood of
divisive philosophical sewerage spills over from the basements of hatemongers
into the higher reaches of foreign offices. The ability to create nearly
instantaneous mobs of rage over misdescribed or sensationalized versions of
events can create civil strife that places political order in imminent
jeopardy”.
Do I need to say anything more to convince you that what these people believe is strong by virtue of its moral rectitude, is in reality a fragile construct that’s breaking under the weight of an authentic morality now rising and by which humanity shall live in harmony to the end of time?