Perspectives on US Hegemony

1. Readings: Reveron and Mahoney Norris CH 8, Zakaria, Bacevich, Ferguson, Joffe Perspectives on US Hegemony

2. Guiding Questions • Why do we care about US hegemony? • Should the US maintain hegemony? Can it? • What is meant by “the rise of the rest”? • Does the “rise of the rest” threaten US foreign policy?

3. US Hegemony: Who Cares? • The US remains the sole superpower in the post Cold War world. • Stance on failed states, democracy, the peace process, climate change, etc. has international ramifications • Debates over US decline and its ramifications for international politics focuses on several questions: • What role does US hegemony play in international politics? • How should the US maintain hegemony? • Should the US seek to maintain hegemony?

4. Debunking Decline • Joffe 2009 • Fears about US decline are nothing new • Pundits and scholars habitually raise concerns about the decline of US hegemony • 1950’s-1970’s: Soviet Union • 1980’s: Japan • Today: EU/China • Even in the midst of a major current crisis, forecasting decline ignores the unmatched nature of US influence/strength on all real indicators of power (cultural, economic, military, diplomatic) • Patterns of “glee and gloom” obscure this reality • US military and higher educational system places it in a league of its own • China typically cited as the most likely “threat” to hegemony” • But China does not threaten US supremacy

5. US Hegemony as Empire? • Ferguson 2004 • US hegemony is a fancy term for empire. • Although the US hates the term the US is an “informal empire” • World benefits from a liberal empire • Protect rule of law, reduce corruption, maintain economic markets, etc.). • The US is the only state which can play this role • Accepting the mantle of empire has both materialist and altruistic components. • Materialist: deposing despots and containing epidemics makes the US safer. • Altruism: humanitarian intervention is sometimes necessary and the US is often the only state with the resources to act

6. US Hegemony as Empire? • Bacevich 2008 • US interventionism often justified on the basis of a supposedly existential threat from fundamentalist Islam. • Open-ended “war on terror” motivated by an attempt to consolidate power within the executive branch and the military-industrial complex. • US falsely believes that its strength makes it indispensable and that hegemony gives it the right to impose beliefs and values on other nations. • Focusing on the periphery is damaging for US foreign and domestic policy. • Belief in invincibility led the US to ignore internal threats (i.e. 9/11). • Resorting to force in the name of freedom undermines US values. • And boosts and imperial presidency that undermines Constitution • The belief that the US is beyond challenge fosters a belief amongst the American public that they deserve more than they are willing to sacrifice • Led the US into massive debt and increased dependency on foreign goods (and oil) • Led Americans to believe that their values are universal (and the are not).

7. Maintaining Empire? • Ferguson 2004 • Yes; the world needs US leadership. • But the US is currently only effective in defeating enemies, it is not able to rebuild states. • The US must accept this imperial mantle and fix its internal politics in order to be effective • Economic deficit: relies far too much on foreign capital; massive debt is problematic. • Manpower deficit: small military force /should work with the EU/UN to coordinate peacekeeping forces. • Attention deficit: American public not willing to stay the course. • The first two can be fixed more easily than the third.

8. Maintaining Empire? • Bacevich 2008 • No. • Iraq war is an example of the worst excesses in this “global unending war against terror” • But could also be the “last straw” which forces a fundamental rethink of US foreign policy. • Maintaining the trappings of empire in the name of “freedom” damages US interests. • Makes US less secure globally. • And undermines US democracy. • Debt is unsustainable and threatens to damage the nation. • Politicians must make it clear to the public that power has its limits. • Bringing our goals in sync with the rest of the world will boost US strength. • Abolishing nuclear weapons • Take a leadership role in fighting climate change • Stop preaching to others about democracy.

9. Maintaining Hegemony? • Kagan 2007 • Yes; the world needs US leadership • Regional competition could destabilize the system without a strong US influence • Ensures liberalism retains its international viability in fight against authoritarianism • Creating an alliance of democracies critical for signaling international commitment to democracy • US does not need to blindly push democracy, but the concept is important • Joffe 2009 • No alternative; The US is the “indispensible nation” • The “default power does what others cannot or will not do” • US flexibility can stave off decline to ensure it remains ‘indispensible” • US advantages coupled with its “warrior culture” critical for ensuring global public goods. • Warrior culture: military a function of prestige and social advancement • Liberal empires key for global public goods • Autocratic states do not concern themselves with global goods • Excludes China and Russia as alternatives • Europe lacks the “warrior culture” mentality to take up this mantle

10. History Repeating Itself? • Zakaria 2008 • Polls suggest that Americans are feeling less optimistic about their future. • The “inevitable” rise of China • The fall of the Roman empire and the end of the British empire “reinforce” this feeling of decline • But the US is not the British empire; the British empire had weaknesses the US does not have. • The US has greater economic strength; problems are political. • The UK had political strength but was weak economically.

11. Explaining the ‘Rise of the Rest’ • Zakaria 2008 • Overextension in Iraq and Afghanistan will not bankrupt the country. • The US is not “in decline” • US demographic and educational flexibility will preserve its role as global leader far into the future. • US is not facing the same demographic crunches as Europe and Asia. • Emphasis on “how to think” rather than rote memorization will boost efficiency and innovation. • What we are witnessing is not the decline of the US but the “rise of the rest” • The world the US created (predicated on liberal economic norms) is improving the lives of many around the world. • This “rise of the rest” does NOT threaten the US. • Welcoming the “rise of the rest” allows the US to project influence • But US domestic politics is making this difficult

12. Managing the Rise of the Rest • Zakaria 2008 • The world benefits from US leadership • But it can only be undermined from within • Domestic political trends favoring isolationism threaten US hegemony • Examples: • Trade restrictions against China • Limits on immigration and restricting student visas. • US provincialism (lack of language study etc.) • Puts the US at a strategic disadvantage vis-à-vis the rest of the world • Attempting to undermine this rise would result in nationalism. • Undermines US postwar leadership.

13. Final Examination • Note: New link for Fukuyama • www.wesjones.com/eoh.htm • Due between 11:30 and 2:30pm on 5 December 2011 • Location listed on TritonLink