The territorial integrity of a nation would be the most important concern for any leader-if not for the economy, the nation’s diplomatic standing, the capabilities of its military, or the interests of its citizenry. Security, especially in a geographical context, has less and less importance in the contemporary global theater. Virtually all of the world’s major players have moved past their imperialistic era, replacing territorial acquisition with economic dominance.
Territory is no longer a valid means of exhibiting national power, due largely to the complete exploration of the world and the claiming of all available land. Though some territory is still the subject of international dispute, most notably Israel/Palestine, many of the more powerful nations, being allied with themselves, have no motive to acquire more land. This is also because land is not essential to survival or economic development, as is the case in agrarian societies. The means to international recognition and power is now economic strength, not square mileage.
The security of a nation is still a legitimate concern; it should always be among the top priorities of any effective leader. But to designate it as the primary focus of the leader would be to induce a reactionary trend towards 19th century imperialism, a move that would discredit the progression of society since neocolonialism. Nations do not wage war or conduct international diplomacy with the intention of seizing new land; they do so in order to protect their economic interests. The current war in Iraq, as well as negotiation attempts with Russia, will prove this postulate.
No comments:
Post a Comment