Yearning for American Leadership
Posted 51 weeks 2 hours ago byThe following is from a posting I did a little over a week ago on my own website, www.gregrlawson.com
I think the articles I refer to make it clear what the framework of American foreign policy must remain.
I generally agree with the thrust of this piece (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...) that argues the world at large will seek American involvement in a host of issues as the new President enters the White House a year from now. This is really because of what I have indicated before, "If Not Us, Who?" We may not be universally loved, but most nations realize that even with our mistakes, we are still the best bet in keeping relative world stability.
Echoing this point is this article from the a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (and author of a book I picked up for Christmas), Walter Russell Meade (http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/...).
This article makes clear that we are the purveyor of a series of international "public goods" that are also in our "national interest." No doubt this is true as I have argued elsewhere. If we don't provide a security blanket for the Middle East, it is highly possible a revisionist state either within the region (like an Iran) or without (like Russia or possibly a more militarily capable and confident China) will look to provide that stability (and secure either preferential access to oil or control over the resources under their conditions). We prevent that.
We also have (thus far) kept the Japanese from literally going nuclear as a mechanism of defense in a region with new nuclear power North Korea, nuclear power China, and a region that still harbors animosity towards Japan for the sins of the Imperial days in the 1930s and 40s. If they went nuclear, a serious arms build up in East Asia would virtually be guaranteed.
Finally, our naval superiority keeps trading lanes relatively open and free from parochial extortion.
Those are all pretty good things America offers the world that no one else can, yet.
Thoughts
East Asian Arms Race
Submitted on January 17th, 2008 by GregRLawsonI do not think it is inevitable provided we continue our indispensable role as a balancing power by offering security guarantees to allies.
I think despite anti-American sentiment (particularly in South Korea under their former President) in some countries, there remains trepdiation about North Korean unpredictability and long term Chinese ambitions. This allows us a lot of leverage so long as the diplomacy is conducting in a low key but ever present fashion.
Teddy Roosevelt's maxim of "Speaking softly and carrying a big stick" is very true in this region. The Bush Administration has not done too bad over there, but like many of its problems,often its rhetoric surpasses its real willingness to engage in concrete actions.
An East Asia arms race is a frightening thought for sure.
Submitted on January 17th, 2008 by The Big KlosowskiI'm hoping we can help keep balance in that region for years to come. But would do you think that eventually it's inevitable?