The most fundamental point of Barnett’s theory lies on the necessity of the United States government to formulate a new department that will handle the transition of countries after the invasion and war. This includes the good relationship with the locals and the establishment of a system of government that is founded with the same rule set that will harmonize the global and political economy.
As he argued, the United States military with its powerful arsenals that is beyond any military force in the globe can undoubtedly win the war with any rivals. As far as the United States military is concerned, there is no air force that is willing to fly against the United States air force. There is no debate that the United States can win any war and defeat any country. The problem lies not on winning the war but rather on winning the peace. The case of Afghanistan, Iraq, and Sudan etc.
had shown us that winning the war, crushing the enemies and deposing its leaders will not signify or assure the end of their era. What is more important is the transition phase and the maintenance of peace that will allow the United States government and its military together with the countries involved to move on after the war. In this case, the United States encounters a big difficulty. The case of the nations and countries that was mentioned above prove this argument.
Because of this, the United States, for it to be an effective police and peacekeeper of the globe should focus on institutionalizing a department or an agency and building effective personnel that can manage to pull of the transition and the maintenance of peace that will really allow the United States and the country to move on. This had lead Barnett to his new point in regards to the geography of the critical nations and regions that should be a concern of the United States. Barnett argued that the threat in the globe no longer lies on powerful nations just like what it is the case in the past.
Countries like Japan, Germany, Italy, Russia and China which are part of what he called as the ‘core’ are no longer the main concern of the United States in its security. What must be the concern of the United States are the countries that are undeveloped. These countries pose a greater concern to the global security rather than the developed ones. We can see it in the case of the most recent wars that the United States and the world had seen. Wars that were waged on Iraq, Afghanistan, Korea and Vietnam are great examples of this point.
The era had passed that the main concern lies in the countries that are developed like Japan and Germany which is the case in the last two world wars. The problem now lies on the underdeveloped nations which is what he referred as the ‘gap’ that possess a capability to launch low-budget yet lethal attacks on the United States and its allies. Thomas P. M. Barnett even spoke of China not as a threat in the global peace of the world. Contrary to some prediction of a cultural and civilization crash between the United States and China, Barnett saw China as an ally for the United States’ peace effort rather than as a threat to this project.
Once again, this is connected to his new point of widening the scope of the core. The United States must strengthen its efforts to help the countries located in the gap to develop that will make them to be a non-threatening force to the global security. By helping these nations to rise up, the United States and the globe will be more secured and these countries will later be a part of a new team that will entail development in their own regions. The role of the United States as a police must be expounded to a role of bringing economic development and political development.
This is see exactly in the case of South Korea which was received a huge help from the United States to its development. Today more than ever, the country became an honest ally of the United States both in terms of security, humanitarian efforts and of course trade. For sure, Thomas Barnett had provided a new perspective in assessing the role of the United States in the global development, in areas of politics, security and economy. The case of Afghanistan and Iraq had brought us numerous reasons to doubt our approach on war and peace. With the revolutions made by technology, there became a great shift on treating war and invasion.
Winning war is more than killing your enemies. The more important part is to win the favor of the locals and to convince them that a shift is necessary for the change to manifest in their lives. Barnett had produced a very persuasive course of action to remedy the problems of the recent wars of the United States. One thing is for sure that we learned here, power is not everything. Works Cited Barnett, Thomas P. M. (2005) Thomas Barnett draws a new map for peace. TED. 2005. Retrieved from http://www. ted. com/talks/thomas_barnett_draws_a_new_map_for_peace. html. Accessed 29 May 2010.Sample Essay of PapersOwl.com