Tuesday, July 01, 2008
Unease in New York
A quick observation, based on some of the questions and the after-panel informal discussion: the unease at the types of accommodations the United States may need to make in order to raise capital and obtain energy; that those who can and will finance our debts, invest in our economy and ensure that we remain powered up may want more overt exchanges in return, or at least that this could end up being a bigger drag on our freedom of action on the world scene than we would want to admit.
Interdependence, of course, reduces other countries' freedom of action; they become stakeholders in American success as well--but interdependence is not a condition we are comfortable with.
Nor are we comfortable with the notion that problems might only be managed, not "solved" altogether--and that some of the structural changes taking place in the global economy are not going to disappear any time soon.
Hope TWR readers have had a chance to view the panel--
One of the brightest of British post-war Labour politicians, Denis Healey, put Lord Salisbury's point another way -- he remarked 'problems exist to be survived, not solved.'
This is just laughing-out-loud funny! So the poor dears now understand that after nearly thirty years of "borrow and spend like there's no tomorrow" as well as 20 years of snarling "Thou shalt not have other superpowers before me" to the wold, other countries now have leverage on the US.
And you can tell what the US foreign policy elite are thinking: "Obviously, the only solution is more preemptive wars, to destroy the power of all the others before they can use their new leverage on us. "