Fukuyama also argues that Western ideas are reign supreme (since they “ended” history towards the end of the 20th century). He states that the modern autocracies don’t pose a legitimate challenge to the liberal democratic order. Fukuyama reasserts that liberal democracy is the preferable choice of nation-states. He even says that fundamental/radical Islamism are more of a genuine challenge — one of the statements are completely disagree with; Fukuyama is debunks his own argument by stating that radical Islamism is entirely ineffective when it comes to the ruling idea of a nation-state. However, as is well documented, “democracy” is suffering from a recession (see Larry Diamond’s FA article “The Democratic Rollback). Furthermore, much of the world, especially Latin America and Africa, are saying “no” to the Washington Consensus. Instead, politico-economic paradigms, like the “Beijing Consensus,” are becoming more popular (free-markets and limited political rights).

Overall, Fukuyama’s article is right in saying that we are certainly not returning to a cold war power structure. The autocratic powers today don’t have the truly universal appeal that National Socialism or Communism had, but they do pose a real challenge to the liberal international order, even while working from within its confines (viz. neoclassical market structure). However, I think he’s wrong in saying that we aren’t returning to something similar to the 19th Century Concert of Europe, on a global playing field.

Kicking Russia out of the G8 would be a bad economic move.

The NATO question is something to consider. If by some bizarro, lunatic move, Georgia, the Ukraine, or both were inducted into NATO, the geopolitical consequences would be enormous, amounting to extreme tension (and probably conflict) between Russia and the West.

I doubt Russia is seeking to unify the former Soviet Union. They are merely flexing their geopolitical muscle in their sphere of influence against a recalcitrant and openly defiant Georgia.

As for which candidate will best deal with the “Return of History,” I don’t know. Quite frankly, no one really does, because no focus has really been put on old-school power politics. I’m inclined to shy away from the Republican base, due to their ineffective diplomatic protocol and blatant unilateralism. However, I also shy away from idealistic doves who are more likely to be found in the camp to the left.

Removing Russia from the G8 or other Western international institutional regimes immediately sets it up in strategic opposition rather than extending diplomatic or internationally cooperative approaches. And expanding the Western alliance structures deep into the political/ethnic/national hotbeds of Eastern Europe and Southwest Asia is definitely reminiscent of the pre-WWI structure.

I’m not sure what that means except that it appears that some of the ideas that are gaining quick traction with Americans today are pretty old-school.

Empty and unrealistic threats rarely put nations “in their place”.