America has entered a new phase in its Iraq operations, one that represents the end of the “lost war” to many, the non-combat continuation of nation-building to others, and a vague sense of a never-ending global security commitment to just about everyone. Americans, who crave clear definitions of success or failure, aren’t sure what to make of this turning point, especially since for many, their attention has already shifted to the Afghanistan-Pakistan region. Meanwhile, some pundits sound the alarm with cries of “permanent war,” even though we haven’t officially declared war on anybody since 1943. As for the rest of the planet, humanity currently enjoys the most systematically peaceful period in its recorded history.
Read the entire column at World Politics Review.
Monday, September 6, 2010 at 10:00AM 
Reader Comments (4)
One of your best strategic summaries. Realistic optimism prevails! Keep pushing "The New Rules", your right on! Thanks.
"even though we haven’t officially declared war on anybody since 1943" is a bit disingenuous, isn't it? Apply the duck test, Thomas. I realize this rhetorical device is apposite the observation that some see permanent war as the defining feature of American civilization, but military intervention - do you prefer that term? - might be indistinguishable from some observers as a declared war. And our "engagement" in Iraq has gone on longer that any of our declared wars.
Regards,
Michael Sierchio
Perhaps trying to involve emerging powers in addressing human rights issues in places where they have influence (Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka, North Korea) is a good vehicle for inducing them to take more responsibility for the security and stability of the global order, as recently suggested by Human Rights Watch in acknowledging a $100 million gift from George Soros for the purpose of making HRW more of an international, rather than strictly American, institution.
"History;" "turning back," etc.
Can we, however, with globalization, have a period like the "Dark Ages" (or the Early Middle Ages)?