In World Politics this week we discussed the national security strategies of the 1950s compared to that of 2010. The major differences between the two documents demonstrate both how far we’ve come, but also how the issues we are faced with have become more threatening.
At the beginning of the Cold War, the United States’ strategy focused on Soviet Union containment, whereas we are now focused on the fight against “violent extremism.” Although both issues are fighting ideologies in some ways, communism and anti-American sentiments, the difference of who is creating the threat poses a larger risk to national security. In 1950, we were fighting against a state. This is a situation we have faced before, state-to-state combat. Even though the circumstances of why the United States was fighting differed from past wars, it was generally the same idea. However with the growth of terrorism, the United States is facing a threat posed by non-state actors, people that are difficult to trace, contact, and negotiate with. We have entered a completely new arena of world politics.
Although the 2010 document portrays all that the United States has accomplished over time, it also shows how dire our situation is, especially in comparison to 1950. Nuclear warfare is still an issue, except this time it is even more difficult to discover where they might be coming from. All this is hidden in Obama’s optimistic and hopeful language, which does an excellent job of reducing fear of the threat that we face with terrorists. It seems as if we have nothing to worry about. I’m not sure if I appreciate that or not, Obama.
While our class hasn't discussed these articles yet, your post really highlights the similarities and stark differences that exist with the U.S. and the threats its faced over the years.
ReplyDeleteI'm curious though as to whether you believe the threats that existing during the Cold War were larger or smaller than the threats that exist today. Is it more threatening to face an entire country that can utilize its resources, or a group of violent extremists that can strike without a moment's notice.
Additionally, do you think the U.S. is more or less prepared to deal with threats than it was in the 1950s? While the U.S. has innovated and modernized since then, so have the threats that exist in society.
I think the threats we face today pose a much larger danger than in the 1950s. Before, we were facing one entity that was also a state. This is a concentrated "enemy" that can easily be confronted, when necessary. Now, we are faced with non-state actors that, as you said, "can strike without a moment's notice." This makes them that much more difficult to fight or protect ourselves against. As James Woolsey said,‘‘we have slain a large dragon, but we live now in a jungle filled with a bewildering variety of poisonous snakes."
ReplyDeleteAlso, I think we are much less prepared to deal with these threats because we have never fought non-state actors of this multitude and capability.