Skip to main content

Balance of Power

The international system is facing a period of increasing upheaval. The duopoly of power: the Soviet Union facing the West, has given way to a radically different order. Initially the emergence of a single "hyperpower" -the United States- was suggested to be "the end of history", or rather the end of ideological struggle. However, it is now clear that the United States is not as preeminent as it had seemed.

The shock of September 11th revealed that critical challenges now came from outside the state system- from small and ruthless groups with a seemingly limitless appetite for death on an industrial scale. Meanwhile, the economic strength of the US has been challenged- first by China and now, increasingly, by India. As other powers emerge: Brazil and a resurgent Russia, it is clear that the old certainties are giving way to new uncertainties.

In this world of more even wealth and greater competition, the position of Europe has grown ever more uncertain. Initially Europe seemed to be the big winner of the end of the cold war. From being the cockpit of the cold war conflict, Europe has reunited, with the institutions of the European Union and NATO gaining almost all of the former Soviet occupied states as new members. Yet, this superficial success masks a great crisis.

The United States is challenged by the new balance of power, the European Union is not merely challenged, it is threatened. The economic structures that were created in the post war world are now threatened by competition and by demographics. Instead of funding savings, the socialist systems created in the 1950's and 1960's chose to fund welfare through government expenditure- a mistake that has had profound implications for wealth of all subsequent generations. Indeed the creation of comprehensive social protection now threatens European competitiveness to such an extent that it is difficult to see how it can be maintained in its current form at all.

For the Conservatives, the answer is clear- to cut ties with the European Union and to forge a new niche as a dynamic, privateer economy off shore of the lumbering socialist behemoths of the European Union. The problem, although British demographics are OK, and helped considerably by the relatively open door that the UK has allowed to the workers from the new EU member states, is that the UK is not particularly competitive compared even to many EU economies. The disruption that leaving the EU would cause- irrespective of whether the EU takes punitive action against the UK, which would certainly be a possibility under some circumstances- would create so much uncertainty as to undermine the British investment cycle, and reduce the efficiency of the British economy still further.

Thus, the UK will still need to negotiate its position with the European Union, and ultimately the UK can not separate its own destiny from the success or failure of the European economy, with which it conducts 70%-80% of its trade. This fundamental reality may be unwelcome in certain quarters, but Britain is not isolated within the EU. The Nordic countries and most of the new members are firmly on the side of a less intrusive, more Liberal European Union. It is now up to British diplomacy to make the best of a potential reforming group- one that may yet include Germany, the swing state of the EU- in order to put forward a new agenda for the European Union. This agenda must recognise the scale of the crisis that faces the continent and begin the process of radical reform that can maintain Europeans in the face of the increasing challenges from the rising global powers of Asia and America.


Popular posts from this blog

Post Truth and Justice

The past decade has seen the rise of so-called "post truth" politics.  Instead of mere misrepresentation of facts to serve an argument, political figures began to put forward arguments which denied easily provable facts, and then blustered and browbeat those who pointed out the lie.  The political class was able to get away with "post truth" positions because the infrastructure that reported their activity has been suborned directly into the process. In short, the media abandoned long-cherished traditions of objectivity and began a slow slide into undeclared bias and partisanship.  The "fourth estate" was always a key piece of how democratic societies worked, since the press, and later the broadcast media could shape opinion by the way they reported on the political process. As a result there has never been a golden age of objective media, but nevertheless individual reporters acquired better or worse reputations for the quality of their reporting and

We need to talk about UK corruption

After a long hiatus, mostly to do with indolence and partly to do with the general election campaign, I feel compelled to take up the metaphorical pen and make a few comments on where I see the situation of the UK in the aftermath of the "Brexit election". OK, so we lost.  We can blame many reasons, though fundamentally the Conservatives refused to make the mistakes of 2017 and Labour and especially the Liberal Democrats made every mistake that could be made.  Indeed the biggest mistake of all was allowing Johnson to hold the election at all, when another six months would probably have eaten the Conservative Party alive.  It was Jo Swinson's first, but perhaps most critical, mistake to make, and from it came all the others.  The flow of defectors and money persuaded the Liberal Democrat bunker that an election could only be better for the Lib Dems, and as far as votes were concerned, the party did indeed increase its vote by 1.3 million.   BUT, and it really is the bi

Media misdirection

In the small print of the UK budget we find that the Chancellor of the Exchequer (the British Finance Minister) has allocated a further 15 billion Pounds to the funding for the UK track and trace system. This means that the cost of the UK´s track and trace system is now 37 billion Pounds.  That is approximately €43 billion or US$51 billion, which is to say that it is amount of money greater than the national GDP of over 110 countries, or if you prefer, it is roughly the same number as the combined GDP of the 34 smallest economies of the planet.  As at December 2020, 70% of the contracts for the track and trace system were awarded by the Conservative government without a competitive tender being made . The program is overseen by Dido Harding , who is not only a Conservative Life Peer, but the wife of a Conservative MP, John Penrose, and a contemporary of David Cameron and Boris Johnson at Oxford. Many of these untendered contracts have been given to companies that seem to have no notewo