New year promises to be a 'watershed' like 1968

Is 2008 the new 1968? You might think so, given all the comparisons we're seeing between then and now. World turmoil, assassination, an unpopular war and a wide-open presidential contest make it tempting to draw such parallels (and there is, of course, that 40th-anniversary hook), but they are of a type that generally make serious historians cringe.

To study history is not to look at events and dates in isolation, but rather to seek an understanding of causes and effects, of movements and trends. Viewed this way, it's hard to see what this new year could truly have in common with that time of Vietnam, of Kennedy and King, of Humphrey and Nixon. Except for one thing: Like 1968, 2008 promises to be a watershed year.

It isn't the upcoming presidential election that will make it so, so much as the enormity of the questions that this election will decide. Looking at the issues we as a nation are grappling with, from Iraq to global warming, it's not hard to envision looking back at 2008 and describing it as transformational.

But what makes this even more likely is the approach of two other elections this year, elections in which American voters will have no say but that stand to greatly affect the world in which we will live. The first is scheduled to take place in Pakistan on Feb. 18, the second in Russia on March 2.

Pakistan, neighbor to Afghanistan and the ideological birthplace and current refuge of the Taliban, is the real central front of the war on terrorism. But it is more than that, as one hopes more Americans are beginning to appreciate. It is the only Muslim country with an arsenal of nuclear weapons, one increasingly shaken by political instability. And its proximity to longtime foe and fellow nuclear power India make it a place where one can imagine the horrible vision of nuclear war becoming a reality.

The way in which Pakistan's upcoming elections (postponed from Jan. 8 in the wake of Benazir Bhutto's assassination) proceed, and how they are perceived by the Pakistani public, will tell us a great deal about whether that nation can and will pull itself back from the brink of chaos. Chaos in Pakistan is something to be feared greatly.

It wasn't that long ago that chaos was something to be feared in nuclear-armed Russia, as well - remember all the health scares and coup rumors in the Yeltsin years? But today's Russia is a very different nation from the one in which Boris Yeltsin handed his deputy Vladimir Putin the presidency on New Year's Eve 1999.

The worldwide spike in oil prices brought on in part by the invasion of Iraq has the Russian economy booming, and Putin has used Russia's energy wealth to resurrect his nation's status as a world power.

By endorsing First Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev for the upcoming elections, Putin made it seem likely that he will continue to exert a strong influence on Russia's course after his term ends, possibly through the office of prime minister. What this will mean for a resurgent Russia's actions on the world stage and where U.S. interests are concerned may depend in part on how our own government deals with an election that will probably signal serious concerns for the future of Russian democracy.

So forget 1968. The new year will carry its own, unique challenges. The plot is thickening in our global drama, with the United States no longer the only important player on stage. And no script from 40 years ago can tell us what's in store.

Dan Rather, a native of Wharton, was Managing Editor of the CBS Evening News for 24 years. His column appears by arrangement with King Features Syndicate.