Politics & Policy

For 2014, Globe In Partes Tres

Chinese President Xi Jinping (left) and Russian President Vladimir Putin
Democracies face two separate, growing threats: statist authoritarians and ideological fascists.

Neither the United States nor Europe is locked in a deadly, apocalyptic competition with Russia, China or anyone else. We are not fighting proxy wars. The world has not been divided into two Orwellian halves, democrats vs. communists.

Anne Applebaum is right to see risk in the rise of China and Russia.

Yet, in her main assertion — that a renewed Cold War mentality would be an exaggerated overreaction — Applebaum could not be more wrong.

We face a world that’s just as dangerous as that of the Cold War era, and perhaps more so. Where the Cold War was constrained by the mutual threat of thermonuclear destruction, the combination of nuclear proliferation, disparate interests, and fear has made this moment fraught with danger.

To secure our better future, we must accept that the world is now dominated by three competing philosophies.

The first philosophy is that of the statist authoritarians. We often dismiss the threat posed by these regimes. Surely, we claim, China would never be so stupid as to challenge American military power. Similarly, we assure ourselves that modern Russia is a shadow of its past strength.

We’re being delusional.

In China, the Standing Committee of the Communist party continues to play a “pick and mix” approach toward international order. Where China’s leaders seek foreign investment, they churn out the language of mutually beneficial globalization. But there and elsewhere, threats of intimidation always lurk under and above the surface. We need to face up to their agenda: The Chinese dragons don’t seek unity with the West, they seek untrammeled power. In the restrictions they continue to impose on their own people, China’s leaders reveal their true agenda — subjugating individuals and individualism to the power of the state.

Then there’s Putin’s Russia, the world’s most powerful mafia state. Today’s Russia is a nation in which businessmen are props for Putin’s WWE-style masculinity  and for his supposed magnanimity. His foreign policy is about unrepentant domination. With arrogant glee, Putin watches Syrians burn, then claims the mantle of peacemaker. Closer to home, the Russian leader bribes and bullies nations into submission. Russia has become the Soviet Union with a better suit.

The second philosophy is that of the ideological fascists.

From Baghdad to Nairobi to Sanaa, ideological fascists cut down all who dare to oppose them. Hiding behind a pretense of legitimacy and supported by their patrons in Tehran, Lebanon’s Hezbollah is strangling the diverse democracy that it claims to defend. Meanwhile, with a renewed flow of cash from the Sunni Arab kingdoms, the global Salafi jihad rampages across the planet, constantly stalking fresh blood for its “righteous” cause.

Whatever the competing agendas of these fanatics, Syria demonstrates the common outcome of their endeavor: a land of abject chaos and extraordinary human suffering. This is the price the ideological fascists are proud to pay for their power.

The stakes are apocalyptic: If Iran acquires nuclear weapons,  their hate will find unrestrained expression

Then there are our states: the democratic states. Wearied by war and uninterested in a world of complexity, democracies are relinquishing their influence to others. Instead of applying our power, we hide behind the vapid notion of a self-sustaining international system. The costs of our new weakness are clear. Take Brazil’s flirtation with the “toilet paper” republics of Cuba and Venezuela. Where democracies fail to assert their principles, where they fail to condemn the injustice of kleptocracies, where they allow Chinese and Russian aggression without apology, where they equivocate in the face of fascists, they render themselves powerless.

In March 1946, facing the rise of the Soviet Iron Curtain in Europe, Winston Churchill urged caution against the desire to appease totalitarianism: “We cannot afford, if we can help it, to work on narrow margins, offering temptations to a trial of strength.” Sixty-seven years later, this again rings true.

As 2013 closes, the world is divided into three parts, competing for the future of humankind. If we care about our future, we cannot afford continued equivocation. Our freedom has given us both the inspiration and the power to oppose the encroachment of injustice. We must use it.

Tom Rogan is a blogger based in Washington, D.C., and a contributor to TheWeek.com and the Guardian.

Tom Rogan — Tom Rogan is a columnist for National Review Online, a contributor to the Washington Examiner, and a former panelist on The McLaughlin Group. Email him at TRogan@McLaughlin.com

Most Popular

White House

The Problem Isn’t Just the GOP, Mr. Comey

During a CNN town hall on Wednesday night, James Comey alleged that the Republican party allows President Trump to get away with making inappropriate statements without holding him accountable. “If the Republicans, if they just close their eyes and imagine Barack Obama waking up in the morning saying someone ... Read More
Law & the Courts

‘Judges for the #Resistance’

At Politico, I wrote today about the judiciary’s activism against Trump on immigration: There is a lawlessness rampant in the land, but it isn’t emanating from the Trump administration. The source is the federal judges who are making a mockery of their profession by twisting the law to block the Trump ... Read More
White House

Trump’s Friendships Are America’s Asset

The stale, clichéd conceptions of Donald Trump held by both Left and Right — a man either utterly useless or only rigidly, transactionally tolerable — conceal the fact that the president does possess redeeming talents that are uniquely his, and deserve praise on their own merit. One is personal friendliness ... Read More

Columbia 1968: Another Untold Story

Fifty years ago this week, Columbia students riding the combined wave of the civil-rights and anti-war movements went on strike, occupied buildings across campus, and shut the university down. As you revisit that episode of the larger drama that was the annus horribilis 1968, bear in mind that the past isn’t ... Read More

Only the Strident Survive

‘I am not prone to anxiety,” historian Niall Ferguson wrote in the Times of London on April 22. “Last week, however, for the first time since I went through the emotional trauma of divorce, I experienced an uncontrollable panic attack.” The cause? “A few intemperate emails, inadvertently forwarded ... Read More