American foreign policy: history and frameworks

Foreign Relations

Summary of chapter on "Alternative Futures:

The United States as an Ordinary State"

In this chapter, the author argues that (despite appearances to the contrary), there are always choices as to the future direction of any state. America seems to be committed to a war on "terror" by the events of September 11th and the subsequent conquests in the Middle East. This author argues that no such commitment exists, but that America still has the freedom of action to allow any number of future policy directions to exist. The United States, the reader is asked to remember, has not always had an expansionist perspective or sought to save the world.

It is important, the author claims, that as America considers going to war that we also consider the "victor's strategy," which is the way in which the world will be ordered after the war. Many of the greatest problems in history have arisen in the aftermath of wars which were not wisely concluded. The author does not mention this, but it is generally held by historians that the second World War and Hitler's rise to power was a direct result of the punitive way in which the treaties were drawn up after the first World War and the tensions that were there-after allowed to remain. In ancient days, it was common for conquerers to take all the people of an overcome land and distribute them as settlers or immigrants to other cities, so as to prevent post-war rebellions or a return of hostility. Of course, no one today would seriously suggest that all the inhabitants of Iraq should be relocated to other more westernized cultures in an attempt to normalize them.

The second half of the chapter proceeds to explore a slightly more reserved foreign policy. This section suggests that rather than continuing to view itself as a super-power, the United States should consider its position as just one among many countries. In doing so, it would cease to think that it could unilaterally address all the issues of the world, and would either accept the fact that they could not be addressed or -- more optimally-- would seek to find multilateral solutions which took the sovereignty of that nation into account and refrained from treating the entire world as its backyard. The writer takes a very strong stance on this issue, saying that: "The American century is over, and the challenge facing policy makers is no longer that of managing alliances, deterring aggression, or ruling over the international system."