Foreign Relations the United States

Foreign Relations

The United States should adopt a policy of speaking softly and carrying a big stick. This policy is more congruent with the country's capabilities and presence in the world. It recognizes the fundamental fact that the United States has a big stick. Adopting a Gandhi-esque policy of carrying no stick makes little sense as a result. Gandhi was essentially forced into adopting his policy of non-violence. He had little real leverage over the British. Going against a large military power, he would have met with failure had he adopted a violent approach. His revolution would have been quickly quashed by the British. The adoption of a policy of non-violence was a tactic born of necessity.

For the United States, the stick already exists. The U.S. has the world's largest military, with the highest level of technology and with nuclear capabilities. America is the world's largest economy and is a major trading partner for most of the world's countries. It would be impossible to have a small stick under these circumstances. As a result, foreign policy must be designed around the reality that the U.S. is the world's largest economic and military power.

However, it is important to work within the limits of that power. The U.S. has the choice to speak softly or speak loudly. Current foreign policy is clearly based on 'speak loudly'. The nation actively involves itself in the affairs of other countries, instigates conflict, and overthrows governments. The response from the global community is naturally going to have a strong negative element as a result of this policy. The case can be made that there are a number of nations willing to engage in saber-rattling and testing the limits of U.S. power. For these countries, holding the big stick may not simply be enough.

That said, the majority of U.S. foreign policy should be guided around the principle of speaking softly. The reality is that the United States is neither large enough nor powerful enough to wield its big stick around the entire world at once. In order to achieve key foreign policy objectives, the U.S. must find partners in other nations. Smaller nations with limited power can be coerced simply by the nature of economic dependence. For most of the world's major economies, however, a degree of soft speech is required.

Wielding a big stick on larger countries is likely to alienate them. In recent years, we have seen significant alienation of U.S. allies. The result has been that foreign policy objectives in Iraq and Afghanistan have not met with the anticipated success. Objectives with respect to much stronger adversaries, such as China or Russia, clearly cannot be met by the U.S. alone. Therefore, speaking softly will cultivate relationships and allegiances. Coalitions can be built to help the U.S. attain its foreign policy objectives.

Ultimately, it is worth remembering that size of the America's stick is limited by the extent to which it is can be used. Many adversaries have significant sticks of their own, which limits the willingness of the U.S. To use its full might. As such, the real power of the United States is lower than its theoretical power. Roosevelt understood that through a calm, reasoned approach, the U.S. could forge and maintain significant allegiances, thereby increasing the nation's power and allow it to attain more of its foreign policy objectives.