Two decades after the end of the Cold War it is sad to see the two main antagonists of that global rivalry still talking in terms of missiles and intercontinental security umbrellas.
At a time when our mutual enemy is the destruction of the environment the rhetoric of some world leaders still seems to be caught up in the annihilation of each other.
The standoff between U.S. President George W. Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin does no one any good, least of all the nations in question.
It unnecessary creates friction at a time when international cooperation is most imperative.
Sadly, it distracts from the noble effort of Chancellor Angela Merkel at the G-8 Summit in Germany to set targets for cutting emissions that cause global warming.
We hope the two leaders will end their verbal spat no later than their planned meeting in Kennebunkport, Maine.
Much of the disagreement revolves around U.S. plans to base a missile defense system in central Europe, traditionally regarded as Russia's front yard.
Putin has countered with tough talk of pointing Russian missile at European target.
The underlying context is how the two great rivals (enemies) of the Cold War reconcile their positions in the changing world order.
America is forever in fear of losing the hegemony it inherited by default at the Cold War's end. It continuously seems to be seeking new enemies, as if needing to justify its existence and its sizable military and supporting industries.
Its forays have diminished its image from a paragon of the free world to that of an occupation army.
American (military) supremacy breeds smugness in its global view, unchallenged in its persistent violations of international norms.
Forget Myanmar or North Korea, it is often the Bush administration's foreign policies that give democracy a bad name.
Its wariness breeds suspicion of all other major powers who dare to threaten its hegemony, Russia and China in particular.
Russia, for its part, is the giant bear that has lost its way. Spurred by petro-dollars Putin is trying to regain the respect (and fear) once commanded by the former Soviet Union.
As a major power Russia deserves its role in the upper tiers of global leadership, but where it exactly fits in is a paradox.
Putin was out of order in even suggesting that his country's missiles could once again be pointed west. But we believe as strongly that the United States and NATO should reconsider the benefits of missile tracking radars and interceptors based in Poland and the Czech Republic.
Have we forgotten the lessons of history so quickly?
The closest the world came to nuclear holocaust was as a result of these superpowers deploying nuclear arsenals in each other's back yard.
The eventual outcome of the 1962 Cuban missile crisis was a global sigh of relief and the dismantling of missiles in Cuba and Turkey.
While the peril seems distant the parallels are unavoidable.
We in Indonesia would rather see two of the world's most powerful and proudest men instead engage in discussion about how the significant contributions of greenhouse gas emissions from both countries can be reduced.
That's the kind of leadership we want. That's the kind of struggle we would like to see.
