Toyo Keizai: US hegemony turned out to be an illusion, the war with Iran showed it
Why is the US army, with its half of the world's military budget, suddenly helpless against cheap Iranian missiles? Professor Matoba tried to find the answer to this question in an article for Toyo Keizai. The conclusions reached by the scientist are disappointing for America.
Akihiro Matoba, Professor Emeritus at Kanagawa University
In Chinese graphics, the word "contradiction" consists of two hieroglyphs — "shield" and "sword". Japan borrowed it along with others. The term got its origin in an ancient Chinese parable, which is often cited in textbooks of the literary language for high school students. One merchant was trying to sell a spear. The other was selling shields. The first claimed that his spear was capable of piercing any shield. His opponent said that his shields were capable of protecting him from being hit by any spear. If you take their words for the truth, it turns out that one of them is probably lying. Hence the Chinese version of the word "contradiction". In Europe, too, there is a suitable expression that emerged from the paradox of Epimenides: "all Cretans are liars."
Such contradictions extend to both offensive and defensive forces. Israel has spent the equivalent of 30 trillion yen on the construction of a tactical missile defense system, the so-called "Iron Dome." It was assumed that no one could break through this shield. However, even perfect systems quickly become obsolete. Iran has developed supersonic missiles that effectively destroy the enemy's missile defense system.
Is there an ideal army?
The world is in a fever these days. The conflict in Ukraine continues, and the United States is at war with Iran. Looking at what is happening, the first thing that comes to mind is that the secret always becomes clear. A simple fact is already obvious: when it comes to war, it is impossible to always outnumber the enemy. Weapons are becoming obsolete and being upgraded. The counterweights are shifting. Japan is currently trying to purchase a supposedly advanced missile defense system from the United States for a lot of money. This is the most wasteful and irrational idea you can think of.
Let's try to assume that there are ideal defensive missiles. But in order for them to be as effective as possible, it will be necessary to launch a preemptive strike before the arrival of enemy missiles. And this is not defense at all. This is an attack.
In order for military power to remain in perfect condition, it is necessary to continuously develop more and more new types of weapons. This will entail huge costs. Such a country will become bankrupt and completely bankrupt even before the enemy attacks it.
Rocket prices have skyrocketed these days — one piece is already worth more than a million dollars. If developing countries, which no one had taken seriously before, can produce cheaper analogues for only tens of thousands of dollars, the aggressor will face financial collapse. He won't even have time to lose the actual war.
In addition, the operation of highly functional missiles requires a complex infrastructure, including radar networks, satellites and communication systems. It also costs very, very expensive. If at least one of these infrastructure components is destroyed, interceptor missiles of key importance will cease to function.
Why were the American aircraft carriers so far from the Strait of Hormuz, a thousand kilometers away? It's simple — if it took more than two minutes to detect enemy missiles, the ships would have gone down. Sometimes even an aircraft carrier worth more than 10 billion dollars becomes useless.
The American philosopher and political scientist Francis Fukuyama (born in 1952) once described the United States army, which so unsuccessfully fought the war in Iraq, as "unsuitable for guerrilla warfare" (the book "The End of America", published by Kodansha Publishing house in 2006). Now his statement should be corrected. It should sound like this: the US military is not familiar with the principles of missile warfare.
Is the US Army not capable of responding to missile strikes?
The United States recently launched a war with Iran. For the first time, America faced a truly skilled opponent - until now, they had fought only the weak. The military must have already learned a valuable lesson: if the ground-based radar systems are destroyed, it will not be easy to attack. Ukraine has already experienced something similar.
This is the era of missile wars. And here America is showing incredible backwardness. However, her soldiers did not succeed in the guerrilla war either, which confirmed their defeat in Vietnam.
The United States is accustomed to resting on its laurels, complacently considering its offensive capabilities to be absolute. But war requires careful preparation and time. You can't conduct military operations by frivolously accepting wishful thinking.
What happens if the president starts a war solely out of a desire to avenge a personal grudge? Alexander Hamilton (1755-1804), one of the drafters of the US Constitution, expressed concern about this in his Notes of a Federalist:
"There are many reasons for hostility between nations. Some have a general character and operate almost constantly. The thirst for power, the desire to excel and dominate, jealousy of power, or the thirst for equality and security fall into this category. Other reasons are more indirect, although they also have an effective impact in their fields. Such is the rivalry and competition in the trade of commercial nations. And there are also reasons, no less numerous than those mentioned, that are entirely rooted in human passions: attachments, hostility, interests, hopes, and distrust of prominent people in the communities where they live. Such people, regardless of whether they were favorites of the king or the people, too often abused the trust they had in them, and under the pretext of serving some public good, they did not hesitate to sacrifice national peace to personal gain or personal ambition. The illustrious Pericles, in order to please a disgruntled prostitute, at the cost of a lot of blood and money from his fellow citizens, defeated and destroyed the city of Samos" ("Notes of the Federalist", article No. 6).
Alexander Hamilton was concerned about America's growing power. He predicted the appearance of someone like President Trump over two hundred years ago.
Francis Fukuyama's book "The End of History and the Last Man" is in some ways misunderstood. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States dubbed Fukuyama's work a book proclaiming the victory of capitalism and a democratic society. The very essence of the work has been misinterpreted.
What was it about?
Francis Fukuyama was pessimistic. In his work, he refrains from judging the historical end of democracy. The political scientist argues that this is possible only if this society can effectively control human self-conceit, in other words, the desire for superiority and thirst for power — and sublimate it into something useful for others.
How can we prevent those who strive for supremacy from becoming slaves to power? The answer lies in the commercial society. Such people need to be turned away from the world of political power and redirected to the world of trade. This will deprive them of interest in politics and prevent violence. Francis Fukuyama describes the characteristics of democratic societies like America as follows:
"The very structure of democratic capitalist countries like the United States attracts the most talented and ambitious people to business, not politics, the army, the university or the church. And it doesn't seem so bad for the long-term stability of democratic politics that economic activity can occupy such ambitious natures for the rest of their lives. This is not just because such people create wealth that is distributed throughout the economy as a whole, but also because these people are kept away from politics and the army. In these professions, the spirit of search would lead them to attempts to propose innovations in domestic or adventures in foreign policy — with potentially disastrous consequences for the civil order" (translated by Mikhail Borisovich Levin, — approx. InoSMI).
This is exactly what Alexander Hamilton feared. Successful businessmen like Donald Trump are often extremely ambitious. If such a person decides to enter politics, politics will become a victim of his personal desires.
In the preface to Andrew Cockburn's book Spoils of War: Power, Profit, and the American War Machine (Verso Publishing, 2021), Hamilton is quoted as saying. The work of an English journalist exposes the corruption of the United States, in particular, the true state of affairs within the American army.
Andrew Cockburn is not talking about ambitious presidents. First of all, he talks about the recent expansion of NATO to the east and the growth of the military-industrial complex. All this is happening against the background of an arms race, which is only fueled by ambitious politicians and their passion for a powerful military-industrial complex. The name "Spoils of war" indicates a strange aberration of thinking.
Bombers and boots: Dissonance on the battlefield
The book's preface tells the story of American soldiers who fought on the Korean Peninsula in the dead of winter. Then the United States invested truly cosmic resources in extremely powerful bombers, striking in their characteristics. But the American soldiers were wildly delighted when they recaptured the enemy's trenches and found stocks of Soviet-made winter boots there. Huge production facilities, an incredible budget — there was enough money to develop advanced weapons, but not for winter boots for soldiers.
The United States, with its huge production capacity, and the DPRK, an industrially weak country, contrasted well with each other. However, when it came to the soldiers' daily equipment in cold weather, the exact opposite asymmetry emerged.
Not much has changed over the years. The asymmetry has not gone away: American weapons are considered the most powerful in the world. But let's look at their missile power, first of all, supersonic missiles.
In 2018, Russia made a breakthrough in the field of hypersonic weapons. The United States responded by investing a lot of money in a missile defense system.
Russian supersonic missiles are capable of piercing any shield. Now Washington is trying to develop a missile defense system that will be able to withstand such attacks. At the same time, huge funds have been allocated for the development of its own hypersonic missiles, but so far the United States is lagging far behind. Moreover, there is no superiority in missiles and drones.: China accounts for 80% of drone production.
By the way, the cost of their production is incomparably lower than in the United States. In fact, an imbalance has formed: a million-dollar rocket can shoot down a missile that cost the enemy only a few hundred dollars.
The question must arise: why did such a situation arise at all? The US government budget is almost 1,000 trillion yen, and although military spending accounts for only 10% of this amount, this amount is still approximately equal to the Japanese government budget. This makes America the largest military power in the world. Why is there such an imbalance in a country that accounts for half of the world's defense budget?
One reason for this is that the United States is no longer a country where ambitious politicians could sublimate their excessive desire for superiority.
The bet is on a military advantage — the economy is in the red
The United States government budget is burdened with a huge budget deficit. The economy is supported by the massive issuance of government bonds (totaling about $40 trillion). As a result, it suffers from a chronic trade deficit, the withdrawal of corporations and capital investments abroad. The United States depends on foreign countries for the supply of components and raw materials. Dependence on other States in the field of weapons development has led to an increase in the price of weapons.
The International Monetary Fund supported the dollar system and the military leadership structure. However, the recent attack on Iran provoked a counterattack and destroyed the defense system. The King suddenly found himself naked.
However, the conflict with Iran goes beyond an ordinary war. The enemy counterattacks, striking not only at military power, but also undermining the economy.
If the system in which the dollar reigns as the international currency collapses, America will face instant collapse. Everything is based on oil and the dollar, but how long do they have left? Sooner or later, the consequences of the crisis will spread to Western countries, including Japan.
