International Polarity, Balance of Power, the Cold War and the War on Terror

Polarity has always been an important element of the international stage. A balance of power is impossible without multi-polar or, at a minimum, bi-polar power structures. During the decades of Cold War, the United States painted the Soviet Union and their nation-state allies as evil communists who were hell bent on taking over the world. We have already studied how the balance of power between the United States and the Soviet Union sparked massive arms races, bolstered the space race, and was overall very economically productive for international private sector banking systems, arms manufacturing corporations, military manufacturing corporations, space technology manufacturing, manufacturing of production parts, and many other areas of profitable procurement from capital production. The evil communist empire was an actual nation-state with borders and a government system, which eventually collapsed and ended the bi-polar balance of power (which was so profitable to so many private sectors) which had lasted over three decades.

During the sole polarity era that the U.S. stood as the only world hegemonic superpower, it wasn’t until the attacks of 9-11 an opportunity presented itself to reestablish an international power balance which would increase profitable arms manufacturing and production, military vehicle production, manufacturing parts production, international banking loans, construction, and a score of other private sector areas that profit from a balance of polarity (or the fear of an enemy that creates one). The decade long military occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan have been extremely profitable for the private sector. In the so-called war on terror, the opposing polarity has no physical nation-borders or government expenses (that could collapse like the Soviet Union). It was simply a phantom enemy menace, that could never physically collapse, which required extensive military preparation, intervention and occupation in multiple nation-states as well as domestically The profits off manufacturing, construction and arms (and multiple other areas) achievable by the private sector in such a balance of polar powers are potentially limitless.

Even though the historical period was pre-industrialization and capitalism, the same bi-polar political-religious balancing can be seen during the Crusades led by the Holy Roman Empire.

Farrell, Paul B. War, Terror, Catastrophe: Profiting From ‘Disaster Capital’. Dow Jones Business News, October 16, 2007. (Accessed on December 13, 2012 from http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine/reviews/profiting-disaster-capitalism)

Kidwell, Doborah C. Public War, Private Fight? The United States and Private Military Companies. Combat Studies Institute Press, Leavenworth, Kansas (Accessed on December 13, 2012 from http://www.cgsc.edu/carl/download/csipubs/kidwell.pdf)

Dowdy & Erdmann. Private Sector Development in Afghanistan: The Doubly Missing Middle. (Accessed on December 13, 2012 from http://www.mckinsey.com/client_service/aerospace_and_defense/people/~/media/8BA7705D2083435BAB3654EA60CAF320.ashx) Investing in Afghanistan.

The Embassy of Afghanistan, Washington, D.C. (Accessed on December 13, 2012 from http://www.embassyofafghanistan.org/page/investing-in-afghanistan)