Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
Finally, the United States should reclaim a liberal internationalist public philosophy.
When American officials after World War II championed the building of a rule-based post-
war order, they articulated a distinctive internationalist vision of order that has faded in recent
decades. It was a vision that entailed a synthesis of liberal and realist ideas about economic,
national security, and the sources of stable and peaceful order. These ideas—drawn from the
1940s experiences with the New Deal and the previous decades of war and depression—led
American leaders to associate the national interest with the building of a managed and insti-
tutionalized global system. What is needed today is a renewed public philosophy of liberal
internationalism—a shift away from neoliberalism—that can inform American elites as they
make trade-offs between sovereignty and institutional cooperation.
What American elites need to do today is recover this public philosophy of international-
ism. The restraint and the commitment of American power went hand in hand. Global rules
and institutions advanced America's national interest rather than threatened it. The altern-
ative public philosophies that have circulated in recent years—philosophies that champion
American unilateralism and disentanglement from global rules and institutions—did not meet
with great success. So an opening exists for America's postwar vision of internationalism to
be updated and rearticulated today.
To be sure, recently, massive budget deficits and public debt have placed new constraints
on leaders and foreign policy agendas. Intense partisan and ideological conflicts pervade
American politics, exacerbated by high levels of unemployment and sluggish economic
growth. While the United States struggles, other countries—particularly in Asia—seem to be
prospering. The old optimistic view that the United States is at the forefront of global pro-
gress and destined to lead the world has fewer adherents—both at home and abroad. As one
journalist observes, “Both as individuals and as a nation, Americans have begun to question
whether the 'new world order' that emerged after the cold war still favors the US.” 20 These
are not ideal conditions for American leaders to affirm the virtues of American-style liberal
internationalism. Yet, in another sense, it is precisely in an era of growing economic con-
straints and interdependence that liberal internationalism should have a practical appeal. At
the heart of liberal internationalism is a vision of multilateral partnership, cooperative secur-
ity, and collective action. If the United States cannot defend its interests by turning inward
and hiding from the world, then it will need to find ways to work with other states, sharing
the costs and responsibilities of leadership with allies and partners.
The leading ideas of this liberal public philosophy are ones that the United States should
embrace today:
Lead with rules rather than dominate with power. The United States is best able to garner
support for its central position in the world political order by championing and work-
ing within a system of loosely agreed-upon rules and institutions. As I have argued, this
draws other states into the order while also establishing frameworks of cooperation that
 
Search WWH ::




Custom Search