Christina

Glenn P. Hastedt, American Foreign Policy- Alternative Futures

"We ask three questions of each alternative future:
1. What is the primary threat to U.S. national security?
2. What responsibility does the U.S. have to other states?
3. What responsibility does the U.S. have to the global community?"


1. ORDINARY STATE
The U.S. should conduct itself as an ordinary state, wherein the U.S. does not undertake tasks that most other states would not undertake.

Threat- the greatest threat to U.S. security is trying to undertake too much.
Responsibility to other states- should be proportionate to the responsibility they have towards us.
Responsibility to the global community- the only responsibility that the U.S. has to the global community is to be a good global citizen, and nothing else.

Precepts of this perspective:
- A denial of American uniqueness
- Multilateralism (and a decided break from unilateral action)
- International influence more highly dependent upon economics, diplomacy, and technology.
- Three tasks for the global community to undertake: bringing a balance between Russia and the West, bringing a balance between Arab oil producers and consuming states, and bringing a balance between rich and poor states.


2. REFORMED AMERICA
Historically, America has had to choose between two motivations: imperialist leanings and democratic ideals. This perspective holds that in the past, imperialism too often won out and the U.S. should let its foreign policy be informed by democracy above all else.

Threat- continued fixation on military problems and attachment to power politics thinking
Responsibility to other states- promote democracy globally, and aid democratic allies.
Responsibility to the global community- imposing democracy everywhere, especially using means such as economic sanctions (although these are often criticized as being even more deadly than military interventions) and humanitarian interventions.


3. GLOBAL MANAGER
This perspective holds that the power-politics that formerly dominated U.S. foreign policy are no longer relevant, and a new perspective based on issues of global economics and globalization is in order. In this perspective, the U.S. should seek to maintain its economic superiority in the world market.

Threat- the primary threats to the U.S. are economic in nature, and stem from economic competition from other nations.
Responsibility to other states- help other states deal with economic problems, but don't solve these problems for them.
Responsibility to the global community- this responsibility is great, because the U.S.'s own economic well-being is inseparable from the well-being of other states.


4. PRAGMATIC AMERICA
This perspective holds that the U.S. can no longer afford foreign policies that are on the either extreme end of the political spectrum. It is argued that "selectivity" and moderation should inform our foreign policy decisions.

Threat- continues to be military in nature.
Responsibility to other states- should be selected on the basis of threats that would lessen American security.
Responsibility to the global community- limited.


5. NEO-CONTAINMENT
This perspective holds that world politics continues to be governed by military power politics, and that certain other nations constitute threats that must be contained (some argue that this nation is still Russia, other argue that it is China or Japan).

Threat- U.S. military power should be built up in case of future conflicts with a potentially hostile superpower.
Responsibility to other states- limited to core allies.
Responsibility to the global community- minimal.


6. TRIUMPHANT AMERICA
This position holds that America emerged triumphant from the cold war as the global leader, and that the the U.S. constitutes the unipolar power in the world, with the alternative to American supremacy being chaos (due to the proliferation of WMDs- Iraq, North Korea, and Libya are perceived as prototypical threats).

Threat- proliferation of WMDs.
Responsibility to other states- limited and determined by American interests.
Responsibility to the global community- make and enforce rules to fend off chaos.


7. AMERICAN CRUSADER
Similar to the Triumphant America perspective, but differs in that the U.S. should "aspire to a condition of perfect safety from foreign threats" rather than becoming complacent in its military superiority.

Threat- there are real and immediate threats to American security which much be unconditionally defeated.
Responsibility to other states- the U.S. should help other states, because increasing their security increases American security.
Responsibility to the global community- great.


8. AMERICA THE BALANCER
This perspective holds that a multipolar distribution of power is inevitable,and that the U.S. should move away from unilateralism and be prepared to work with other nations or take on global problems that threaten the U.S. or require its involvement.

Threat- the proliferation of security commitments designed to protect America's economic interests are actually detrimental to American security.
Responsibility to other states- limited.
Responsibility to the global community- limited.

Precepts of this perspective:
- A multipolar distribution of power is inevitable, and attemps to assert American dominance will be futile. Thus, there is little reason for the U.S. to make a routine of always involving itself in the problems of others.


9. DISENGAGED AMERICA
This perspective holds that the U.S. should selectively and thoroughly withdraw from world affairs because the rest of the world has "become increasingly inhospitable to U.S. values and unresponsive to efforts at management or domination." Moreover, the U.S. is perceived to have relatively little impact or potential for effecting change in many world affairs, such as global hunger and the tihrd world. In particular, "military power should no longer be employed to further human rights or economic principles beyond American borders. Instead... American foreign policy should concentrate on protecting American lives and property."

Threat- overactive foreign policy.
Responsibility to other states- minimal.
Responsibility to the global community-minimal.