Arms race goes east I (Central Asia)

The USA and Russia, with endangered economies because of the economic instability, seem keen to go forward with the disarment programs. Not for the Asia-Pacific region.

The approach from Medvedev and Obama looks logical. Not only from a strategic and military point of view, but also economically. In the end, if they can forget about the expensive expenditure of the Defense bill -specially the one derivated from the upkeeping of the nuclear deterrent- that could mean a huge relief for their bad economies. In the US there is even a debate around about if Obama should renounce to the “first strike”, something Americans never took out from the table. But the cuttings aren’t only in stuff. Also in staff, even at a senior level.

On the other hand, the threats from our father’s times are over. Now we won’t need big armies to confront other armies in at least twenty years time. In fact, today’s battleground is an asymmetrical warfare, with invisible foes that attack and retreat like the smoke, and where versatility, mobility and adaptability of small unit is essential. Both, the USA and Russia are working in that way. Also the UK follows the path. And even though the US Army wouldn’t do anything else but maintenance for the oncoming years, they will be without doubt the most powerful force on Earth, even more than all his foes together.

But the Americans aren’t just maintaining the arms. It’s the biggest bill of all armies. The US spends in defense 4.6 times more than the Chinese, 7.7 times more than the Russians, 85.2 times more than Iran and 100 times more than North Korea. The difference for this year is that although it is still growing, it grows less.

Not in Asia. Here, it doesn’t only grow, but sometimes growths even more than in previous years. Up until some point it’s understandable. Asia is the hottest part of the planet right now, where most of the conflicts and instability regimes are (letting aside Africa), from Burma to Sri Lanka. Also where most of tomorrow’s threats are, from Iran to the DPRK. And even where today’s conflicts are taking place, like Afghanistan and Pakistan.

So many problematic people together cannot be good. That’s why, imitating the Europeans, America and Russia after WWII, most of the countries in the region are rearming themselves heavily. Just in case, for what could happen in the future. The dates are fixed, as demonstrated by the new Australian Defense white paper and the Chinese PLAN: 2030.

Iran is a crystal clear example of this. Behind the threatening rethorics of Ahmadinejad, facts are that its power up to date can only endanger weak neighbors. It doesn’t matter what Israel tries to sell us with the fear policy; Iran doesn’t represent a threat today for the West.

Today. But tomorrow it can. Iran is planning the basis for what can be the biggest menace for Israel in all its modern history, and made the mullahs capable of face the Jews without any kind of complexes. The tools are being developed: nuclear weapons, ICBMs and drones to deliver the package.

But probably, the biggest problem is not in Iran itself but in its eastern border: the Af-Pak. The irony of this comes out from the fact that, what started as an operation to stabilize a country and kick the Talibans out from a Government has derivated in a fight to avoid the Talibans taking control of another country in more dangerous conditions.

The fall of Pakistan in hands of a fundamentalist regime would be a huge backstep not only in Washington, but also in Tehran, New Delhi, Tel Aviv and even Beijing or Moscow. It’s not only the problem of having a haven for terrorists, with the back from a state. There is too the threat of Pakistan’s nukes.

Between 60 and 150 weapons, plus the missiles to put them anywhere in a few hundreds miles around, could fall into the hands of some crazy guys whose wet dreams are about that. The threat looks real. At least, real enough to make Washington prepare a plan B to take over the nukes in case Pakistan’s State fails.



Photo; Thomas Cole