And so this is where the post Cold War has brought us: to the recognition that the very totalitarism that we fought against in the decades following WWII might, in quite a few circumstances, be preferable to a situation where nobody is in charge. There are things worse than communism, it turned out, and in Iraq we brought them about ourselves.
In the aftermath of the Cold War, there has been a troubling realization: the authoritarian regimes we opposed during the Cold War might sometimes be more stable than chaotic power vacuums. This irony highlights the complexity of governance, where the absence of a strong authority can lead to far worse outcomes than those experienced under totalitarian systems. The aftermath of interventions, particularly in Iraq, illustrates how attempts to impose democracy can backfire, resulting in chaos and violence.
Kaplan's insights remind us that not all forms of governance are equal; sometimes, a heavy-handed regime can maintain a semblance of order where divided factions threaten to plunge society into disorder. The adverse effects of uprooting established systems without adequate plans for new governance reveal the nuances of political power. The lessons drawn from these experiences challenge conventional views on freedom and authority, emphasizing the importance of stability in a world still grappling with the shadows of past ideologies.
