December 18, 2007
Column: Five events that have defined 2007
There are some events that change the world in an instant: the fall of the Berlin wall; the tanks rolling into Tiananmen Square; the aeroplanes flying into the World Trade Center.
So far, there have been no such defining moments in 2007. Perhaps we should be grateful for that, since world-shaking events are often sudden acts of shocking violence. But it makes it both trickier and more interesting to carry out my annual end-of-year exercise – listing the five most important events of the past 12 months. Nonetheless, I intend to try. If you want to make sense of world affairs, it is useful to identify the most significant events. Also, I like making lists. So here goes:
January: the surge. It is too soon to tell whether US President George W. Bush’s decision to increase the number of American troops in Iraq will go down as the moment when the US began to turn the situation around; or just a last, failed throw of the dice. The big questions still have to be answered. Is a civil war in the offing? What will happen when America withdraws its extra troops?
Read the remainder of this column here. Post comments below.
Interesting to note how the Blog consultation changed two of the five - Blair’s departure and Sarko’s arrival were displaced by Putin’s speeech and Musharraf’s mini-coup.
This looks like a case of violent, pseudodemocratic leaders in developing countries elbowing out EU grandees. But in a way not much has changed - the focus in all four items is on political chiefs, in line with the “Great Men” school of history.
Note that Iraqi violence and Russian assertiveness in Europe appeared in last year’s top five as well.
Posted by: MR | December 18th, 2007 at 5:08 pm | Report this commentAstute analysis, as always, though it will no doubt be seized upon by the Amerophobes and Declinists to support their contention that America is Washed Up. For good. No, really, we mean it this time.
Me, I’ve seen the waxing and waning of this phenom for four decades now, and America’s current challenges are nothing compared to 1968, when the nation’s cities were in flames and the Vietnam War appeared to have no end. Or 1973, when the oil embargo sent inflation spiraling upward and political scandal reduced the White House and its occupants to objects of national (though not international, at least not in France) scorn and shame. Or 1979, when oil prices TRIPLED, the US was humiliated publicly and daily, on national television, and the Soviet Empire was truly on the march and a threat to the free world. Or 1992, when the US appeared as a “helpless, musclebound giant” and everyone said the Japanese juggernaut would make America into a colony run by Tokyo bankers (”They’re buying up Pebble Beach! Rockefeller Center! Rising Sun!!”).
Oops. Did I say Japan? I meant China. As for the Sov-, er Russia, well, Nigeria North may provide cozy lovenests for failed German chancellors but it doesn’t really threaten anyone beyond Tallinn. Economic troubles? Feh. I remember 18% interest rates and double-digit unemployment across the rustbelt (in Detroit, it was 25%) in 1979.
Been there, done that. Here’s a New Year’s resolution, or maybe a wish: That our punditry (Mr Rachman excepted, of course) might get a little historical perspective. And leave aside Chicken Little predictions of the Coming End of US Hegemony, the one that never arrives.
Posted by: thibaud | December 18th, 2007 at 5:31 pm | Report this commentDoes anyone remember what the 5 important things were last year? Presumably Iraq loomed large. It has been replaced by the surge but Iraq,in general, would have been a better heading. I think there will be many twists and turns in the next 12 months, many of which folk even won’t guess at.
One thing that nobody talked about in the blog but that went on in 2007 and will be significant in 2008, is the increasingly deep quagmire in Afghanistan and the choices facing the West will be quite unappetising (withdraw in despair or remain bogged down and, in both cases, watch Afghanistan disintegrate and pull down much of Pakistan with it.)
Finally, I was also intrigued by this article, written by a former Indian diplomat, about the way India’s miscalculations (close alliance with USrael) has lost it ground vis a vis China during 2007.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/IL15Ad01.html
would Indo-Chinese relations be an important topic in December 2008?
P
Posted by: Pacifist | December 18th, 2007 at 6:03 pm | Report this commentAgree on all points, even if somewhat hesitantly on the Surge. Let us hope you are right on this, but I remain unlikely to take pleasure in watching the Bush Admin play to high on this. Apart from core issues relating particularly to Kurdish ambitions, the world awaits some clarity and transparency on how the Iraqi economy is being managed.
Nonetheless, a well reasoned and well argued piece!
Posted by: WCM | December 18th, 2007 at 7:56 pm | Report this commentGideon,
I really think that Afghanistan has to be in the top five. The fraying and straining of the NATO alliance–both in terms of its operational capacities and its management–is of huge geopolitical significance. The success or failure of Nato will influence peacekeeping, humanitarian intervention, a resurgent Russia, China, and disaster response. Surely, this qualifies it for a place on your vaunted list.
Posted by: Crusk | December 18th, 2007 at 8:19 pm | Report this commentAlso, I think the full effect of the credit crunch is still too early to call. Thus, it may deserve a place on your 2008 list, but on the 2007 list, it seems a bit premature.
Posted by: Crusk | December 18th, 2007 at 8:20 pm | Report this commentGideon, I would be especially interested to know what your predictions for the top 5 events of NEXT year will be?
Thibaud, couldn’t agree more. A little perspective certainly helps to put today’s events in context.
Posted by: AYC | December 19th, 2007 at 8:32 am | Report this commentUnable to identify one single event Rachman gives us a list of five and argues that they all are loosely linked together by the strain they put on the US. I do not agree with him. Among his candidates is the “August: the credit crunch” and since even now, at the end of 2007, the supposedly most sophisticated financial machine that our knowledge economy has ever known does still not have a clue about where they find themselves, no one could have doubts that this event, almost a leap back into the dark ages, must by far be the most defining event of 2007.
Posted by: Per Kurowski | December 19th, 2007 at 1:45 pm | Report this commentInteresting that the idea of “American Empire” popped up just after the country had reached its zenith of power–oh, let’s say 1989 with the end of the Cold War, the terrible twentieth century’s second war.
Could we draw a parallel with British Empirism– the phenomenon occurs about 1875 or so, after the unification of Germany, its defeat of France in the Franco-Prussian War and its increasing domination of the European continent? At the same time the era of rapid industrialization (agriculture as well as mechanical) of the US made that country a force to be reckoned with. “Sun never set” and all that and the British Empire really had only about two generations or so before it would begin to dissolve. (I’d date Britain’s withdrawal from Ireland in 1921 as the beginning of the end.)
Posted by: Mary Cunningham | December 19th, 2007 at 2:46 pm | Report this commentAnd nobody can see the global warming issue as the main new threat revealed in 2007 and that we have to deal with? I think it dwarfs the five events you listed.
Posted by: Jean Sireyjol | December 19th, 2007 at 8:48 pm | Report this commentIf the “surge” was important, then it was for its negative consequences.
Here are two of those consequences that we don’t hear:
Firstly, consider this UN report:
http://media.mcclatchydc.com/smedia/2007/12/14/16/IPSOS-II-Survey-Dec07.source.prod_affiliate.91.pdf
34.5%, i.e. more than a third of the refugees fled Iraq between July and October, at the height of the surge.
Nearly 2/3rds (52.5%) of the refugess arrived from the start of the surge.
Moreover, 78% of the refugees are Baghdadis where the surge was at its most violent.
Clearly as the Americans upped their operations, the hapless Iraqis fled.
It is clear that a direct consequence of the surge (and the invasion) is the exacerbation Iraqi refugee problem (estimated at 2 millions) with consequent destabilisation of Iraq and neighbours.
Secondly, consider this McClatchy report on a Pentagon’s assessment of the situation:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/iraq/story/23386.html
Quote
The report also raises questions about the future of so-called concerned local citizens organizations, which U.S. military leaders have credited with helping to quiet many of Iraq’s contentious areas. The U.S. pays the organizations’ estimated 70,000 members to patrol Iraq’s streets, giving them jobs and, U.S. officials believe, less incentive to join the insurgency.
The report said the groups were “crucial to the counterinsurgency effort.” But it also warned that they could evolve into a militia that’s opposed to Iraq’s central government, a fear shared by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki. The vast majority of the concerned local citizens are Sunni Muslims. The government is dominated by Shiites.
Unquote
Clearly, America is storing up a major problem for the future by financing (basically bribing)and arming Sunni insurgent groups. This is the same mistake that they committed in Afghanistan with all the consequences like the rise of Al Qaeda and Taliban. Obviously, nothing has been learned from that fiasco and the “fruits” of this latest misdeeds will be reaped for decades. First by the Iraqis and then by the rest of the world in ever-incrasing ripples.
I wonder if the surge will be best remembered for the above reasons in the years to come and not for the propaganda currently associated with it.
Best,
P
Posted by: Pacifist | December 20th, 2007 at 10:18 am | Report this commentSorry, it was 62.5% (nearly two thirds!)
P
Posted by: Pacifist | December 20th, 2007 at 10:59 am | Report this commentP
“Clearly America is storing up a major problem for the future by financing (basically bribing) and arming Sunni insurgent group”
Who are they storing up problems for? Surely not the Shia militias that Iran is financing and arming?
All the best
Posted by: AYC | December 20th, 2007 at 11:53 am | Report this commentDear AYC,
The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend. We saw that with the way one Mr. O. Bin Laden was trained and armed by Uncle Sam to fight the pesky Soviets. Also do a Google on “blowback”.
Best,
P
Posted by: Pacifist | December 20th, 2007 at 10:31 pm | Report this commentwhat no Nick Clegg!!!
Posted by: robr | December 21st, 2007 at 11:14 am | Report this commentSurely shome mhistake..
well… it seems this post needs to be updated now.
Although Bhutto’s murder is certainly one of the defining moments of 2007, it will have long list of consequences that will shape 2008 and beyond.
footnote: WWI started with a political assasination in the unstable region. I understand, it is a very far fatched parallel but I can’t help it.
Posted by: MYV | December 28th, 2007 at 8:57 pm | Report this commentIn Australia the most important event in 2007 was the dumping of John Howard. He not only lost his job as Prime Minister. He also lost his seat in parliament to a lovely lady. His government brought shame on the nation because of his association with George Bush. The second most important event happened yesterday. David Hicks got out of jail. David Hicks was caught in the wrong place at the wrong time. John Howard supported George in the so-called ‘War in Terror that has now made around 4 million Iraqis refugees, hundreds of thousands dead & injured. The pretext was that Iraq had WMD. The truth is that the US dropped depleted uranium bombs on Iraq in the first gulf war & in the second gulf war & that ordinance is still lying around. Millions of people around the world now know that George Bush is a terrorist who cynically invaded Afghanistan & Iraq just because bin Laden put his hand up & said ‘I am responsible’ for the twin towers. US intelligence has virtually no Arabic specialists so they had been flying blind from the beginning of all this. David Hicks went off on a personal adventure for whatever reason & was swept up in the invasion & put into a hell hole & did a plea bargain in a kangaroo court set up by Bush just to get back to his family. George Bush has spent billions of dollars & continues to spend billions of dollars polluting the planet. The USSR was defeated in Afghanistan & fell apart. Russia under Putin is recovering fast while the US is going into recession.
Posted by: crowsfly | December 31st, 2007 at 6:25 am | Report this commentDavid Hicks, by his own admission voluntereed for “actions” in the west on behalf of his salafists little mates, pledging jihad. For one, I believe it was a scandal to let an Australian rot in neglect in a legal limbo. He should have been brought back home sooner and hanged for hight treason!
Posted by: jeannick | January 2nd, 2008 at 8:57 pm | Report this comment