"Today, once again, the United States is the most respected country on earth," said Barack Obama recently. A healthy dose of scepticism is in order, because even traditional US allies are openly unhappy with Washington. US favourability ratings have fallen by 13 per cent in Germany since 2009 and by 19 per cent in Japan since 2011. In the past few months, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has worked to shoot down the president's attempt to broker a nuclear deal with Iran. A few weeks ago, Britain and other traditional US allies signed on to become members of the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank over Washington's objections. Obama recently hosted a summit of Gulf Co-operation Council leaders, and four of the six leaders sent deputies in their place.
Frustration with Washington is hardly limited to the Obama administration’s choices. It’s a reflection of uncertainty over a fast-changing global order and America’s intentions and staying power. China’s neighbours want to know if the US intends to help them hedge their bets on China’s rise. The Saudis want to know if Washington will continue to protect them from threats, both foreign and (potentially) domestic. Europeans want mainly to balance relations between powerful West and rising East. In some cases, foreign governments want Washington to do more. Others want it to do less. Still others want it to do things differently.
What role should America play in today’s world? What role do American voters want it to play? As the 2016 US presidential candidate heats up, it’s time for a debate about the future of US foreign policy. In an increasingly volatile world, leadership requires hard choices, tradeoffs, risk, and sacrifice. American voters, and the rest of the world, need to know how each of these candidates would make these choices – and whether America should try to “lead” at all.
America and the world have changed profoundly in the past 25 years. Recent polls suggest the American people have grown cynical about the value that superpower status provides US citizens and taxpayers. Adding to the limitations the next president will inherit, many governments now have the political and economic self-confidence to say no to US plans and demands. For both these reasons, pre-eminent power just isn’t what it used to be.
Yet, for the foreseeable future, the United States will remain the only country on Earth with the military, economic, and political muscle to persuade governments in every region of the world to take actions they wouldn’t otherwise take. China is developing extraordinary economic influence, but its military can’t compete with America’s outside East Asia. No other country has the hard power, innovative economy and cultural influence that the United States can draw on. The next president will have real options, and it’s time to start debating them.
In my book Superpower: Three Choices for America’s role in the World, I offer three broad strategies that future US leaders could adopt.
Independent America: instead of squandering lives and resources on poorly planned foreign policy adventures, it’s time for Washington to mind its own business and let other countries accept greater responsibility for their own security and prosperity. Rebuild America’s strength from within. Invest the billions we’ve squandered abroad in American education, innovation, and crumbling infrastructure. Take much better care of the country’s veterans. Leave more dollars in the taxpayer’s pocket to power the American economy forward.
Moneyball America: if the United States is to remain secure and prosperous, there are a few foreign challenges that must be met, and it’s in America’s interests for Americans to meet them. Washington can’t afford to intervene in so many trouble spots at once, but nor can it retreat and expect others to pick up the slack. Focus less on selling American values and more on enhancing America’s value. Stop treating the rest of the world as if they’re “Americans at an earlier stage of development”. Set aside pointless arguments about how “exceptional” America is and build a foreign policy designed solely to make America more secure and more prosperous. Mind the cost. Set priorities and stick to them.
Indispensable America: in a profoundly interconnected and dangerous world, America can’t remain safe unless Washington works to ensure that governments everywhere answer to their citizens. Americans must fight for democracy, rule of law, human rights, and open markets because the world – and therefore the United States – will never know sustainable security and prosperity without them. Someone must lead the alliances that manage conflict, prevent terrorists from gaining access to the world’s most dangerous weapons, contain threats in cyberspace, and lead the fight against transnational crime and the worst effects of climate change. Who but America can do these things? Who but America can lead?
Unfortunately, US foreign policy of the past 25 years should be called “Incoherent America”, because from Somalia to Afghanistan to Iraq to relations with Russia and China, Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama have improvised responses to problems and crises as they arose, and not improvised very well.
I believe that, as the world’s sole superpower, Indispensable, Moneyball, and Independent are all viable options, but only if future presidents can build the durable public support needed to sustain them. Easier said than done, of course, and that’s one of the reasons that Independent America is the choice that comes closest to what I believe is best for the country.
America’s true promise depends now on its willingness to lead by example. To select the Indispensable approach is to ignore the reality that the American people will not support costly interference in countries and questions they don’t care about, and there is no evidence that this trend will prove short-lived. To select Moneyball is to cope with that change by sacrificing American values. Some governments and their citizens might welcome an America that behaves more like an ordinary country, but there won’t be much support for such a cold-blooded foreign policy back home. Most Americans still believe their country is exceptional, even if they don’t agree on what makes America different or how best to protect that difference, and the idea of “value over values” runs counter to what Americans want to believe about themselves and their country.
To embrace Independent America is to find a new purpose for those values. Polling now suggests that a majority of Americans believe “it’s time for the United States to mind its own business internationally and let others get along the best they can”. Perhaps that’s because many now accept that a stronger will, deeper insight, and deeper pockets will not help Washington reshape the world as they would like. It has become unavoidably obvious that no nation, not even the sole superpower, can consistently get what it wants in today’s world.
This is not isolationism. America must never become a fortress. It should continue to export things of value, particularly technology, energy and food. Welcome those who come to America to build a better life for themselves and their families, including a larger share of the world’s growing number of refugees. Embrace trade, including the Trans-Pacific Partnership, because stronger commercial and investment ties will be crucial for the continuing strength of alliances that can no longer depend on US military might.
Nor is it a defeatist vision. Imagine the boost for the US economy if the hundreds of billions spent to rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan had gone to bolster American strength and resilience. Put an end to a prohibitively expensive superhero foreign policy and Washington might finally invest more money more wisely in American education, rebuild failing US infrastructure, and provide proper care for the swelling ranks of US veterans. Allow Americans to keep more of what they earn to help build the strong, resilient economy crucial for the country’s future. Let America’s strength, optimism, dynamism, openness, inclusiveness and innovative spirit serve as the country’s message to the world. Build an America that others believe is too important to fail.
Set and maintain an exceptionally high bar for political and (especially) military intervention beyond US borders. Let Europe lead on Ukraine, and don’t pick fights with Russia that offer America nothing. Insist that Nato can survive only if other members accept a greater share of the costs and risks. Let Germany and Japan, two of the world’s richest nations, assume responsibility for their own security. Share weapons and information with those most threatened by ISIS, but don’t fight another war in Iraq. Don’t stand between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Build trade and investment ties with China, but accept that choices made in Beijing, not in Washington, will decide China’s future.
For the past 25 years, Washington has acted as if America is becoming stronger in the world. It’s not, and its foreign policy should reflect that.
Ian Bremmer is the president of Eurasia Group and author of Superpower: Three Choices for America’s Role in the World. Portfolio Penguin £14.99
@ianbremmer
