As mentioned before, American foreign policy has a core objective which manifests its realpolitik approach towards the world, namely, to start wars and thus sell weapons, given that almost 50 percent of American exports are weapons. America’s weapons merchants even lobbied the government over the course of the last few years so that the government could ease restrictions on weapons sales to terrorists in order to increase their profits. And after starting wars and selling weapons in Afghanistan, the Middle East, and India – in addition to an “Asia Pivot” which has failed to provoke China – the focus of American weapons merchants is now on Europe. David Urban has emerged out of the shadows recently to grace our screens on CNN.
For American weapons merchants, Europe is a possible gold mine. In essence, the Middle East, India, and Afghanistan amount to peanuts compared to what American weapons merchants would make off of a conflict in Europe. Over the course of many years, Europe and East Asia combined had a higher GDP than America. But according to recent projections from McKinsey and Co., Europe will have a higher share of global GDP than America in the coming years. Asia will have 40 percent of global GDP, Europe will have 20 percent, and America will have 15 percent, according to projections from McKinsey and Co.
The impetus for America’s ‘Military-Industrial Complex’ was the Korean War of the early 1950’s. Interestingly, America’s ‘Military-Industrial Complex’ was started by Nazi engineers and scientists who were given safe haven in the United States after World War II. During and after the Korean War, America’s ‘Military-Industrial Complex’ became hyper-charged, and there was no turning back for the ‘Military-Industrial Complex’ ever since. The Soviet Union became the perfect bogeyman and pretext to keep the ‘Military-Industrial Complex’ hyper-charged. Dwight Eisenhower’s plea to rein in on the ‘Military-Industrial Complex’ has largely fallen on deaf ears.
Once the Soviet Union collapsed, the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden became the new bogeymen for the ‘Military-Industrial Complex.’ But when China rose over the course of the last couple of decades, the strategy shifted towards an “Asia Pivot” under the Obama Administration to test the waters in Asia and to see if a conflict could emerge with China. The merry-go-round for the ‘Military-Industrial Complex’ has now landed on Europe as a result of Russia-Ukraine tensions which have intensified recently but began in 2014.
Currently, the divisions among people of European origin means that fragmentation is likelier than cohesion between peoples of European origin. As a result, it will take a lot of energy, effort, and willpower to ensure that reason prevails over irrationality amidst this kind of socioeconomic and sociopolitical climate in order to avoid a full-blown conflict in Europe. Ukraine seems to be the perfect tripwire to fall into a full-blown conflict. Moreover, history shows that something as small as the killing of an archduke belonging to a small country with a very small role in international affairs like Austria-Hungary can lead to a conflagration of war on a continental scale. Thus, time is a double-edged sword and a paradox, in the sense that time can diffuse tensions and yet time can intensify tensions if proactive measures are not taken towards the diffusion of tensions between peoples of European origin.