The End of MAD: America's Nuclear Supremacy, Part 2

Ok I'm scratching my head (figuratively) trying to remember the whole gist of the original article behind this post. Ahhh yes, Schwarz argues that the dominant position of the US will lead to a dangerous environment whereby China and Russia will seek to offset American power by taking their own measures to strengthen their arsenals and in doing so increase risk and create conditions for miscalculation. Unfortunately that's a very vague argument, and it may be that my memory is a little vague regarding the article, but I think that was all Schwarz offered.

Schwarz's argument about competitors reacting or responding to increased US military power by shoring up their own capabilities is not particularly original. It's just the old concept of the security dilemma: any effort by one side to increase their military capabilities will lead to a counter effort by their rivals, so each is back to square one.

The real issue here is that this common security dilemma may not run to its usual course. This is because America's relative position re China and Russia is so far ahead. Even if Russia and China want to compete in a new nuclear arms race they simply don't have the resources to. Well at least Russia certainly doesn't and for China it would take at least 25 years while having to deal with other problems of rapid economic development, environmental management and social cohesion.

The US will remain in its hegemonic position (at least with regards to nuclear and conventional military power) for the foreseeable future because of its current absolute capabilities and the relative weakness of its rivals. This is not to say that the US can always get its own way (as seen in the Iraq Quagmire ... yes it's a quagmire) but simply that it is and will continue to be the leading power in international relations.