Cover Story EPR U.S. Hegemony Challenged? Point/Counterpoint • EPR Winter 09-10 •
U.S. Hegemony is Sustainable By: Anuj Panday EPR Has the American Era ended? Intellectual commentators, government officials, and the media elite seem to think so. Frightening prophecies pervade the headlines. Last year, a New York Times Magazine cover story, titled “Waving Goodbye to U.S. Hegemony,” argued that the United States’ “standing in the world remains in steady decline.” Roger Altman, a former deputy secretary of the Treasury, has written that the financial crisis “has inflicted profound damage on...[the United States’] standing in the world.” This recent scare is characterized by stories of the “rise of the rest” that focuses on the diffusion of economic power outside of the U.S. to rising powers, such as China and India. This argument, however, overestimates the degree to which this is happening and overlooks the enormous inequality of power between the U.S. and others. With a leading position in all indicators of power, the United States will remain the world’s lone superpower for a long time to come. Declinism, a recently developed term for this phenomenon, is not new. Proponents of this theory have been vocal since the U.S. inherited its coveted status in the post-World War II era. In the 1950s, Sputnik spurred the collapse myths. In the 60s, it was the “missile gap.” The 70s saw unprecedented challenges: oil shocks, failure in Vietnam, deep recessions, and victories by Soviet-endorsed regimes in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The 80s saw rapid growth in the Japanese economy along with what historian Paul Kennedy called “imperial overstretch,” where the economic burdens and security interests of an expanding empire eventually outstrip its capacity to manage those burdens or defend its interests. Each of these scares was well-founded and potentially indicated the coming of real change in the power distribution. At the end of each period, however, the United States emerged in a position with its power even further entrenched. According to Dartmouth Professor Wohlforth, “It is impossible to know for sure whether or not the scare is for real this time — shifts in the distribution of power are notoriously hard to forecast.” The problem lies in the confusion of what constitutes leadership. Defining power as the ability to resolve any global dilemma guarantees frequent alarmism. The more powerful the United States becomes, the greater the number of problems in the international arena it is expected to solve. The result is a perpetually elevating standard for what it takes to be the dominant power. It must be understood that no empire is impervious to errors. The United States failed in Vietnam and failed to overthrow Fidel Castro, yet seems to have maintained its leadership status in spite of those failures. Britain at the height of its power could not stop the loss of the American colonies. Alexander the Great failed in Afghanistan, but created a massive empire nonetheless. Failure in Iraq or Afghanistan does not forecast complete doom. What makes the odds even better for the United States than any previous power is that all the fundamental aspects of national power are concentrated in the United States to a degree never before experienced in history. The U.S. spends close to four percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) on the military and “Our power, shaped in part by our adaptability, will allow us to weather the crisis better than other nations.” • EPR Winter 09-10 • accounts for 47 percent of the world’s military spending. The U.S. has invested large sums in institutional capital, technological capacity, and military research and development, all of which give us great qualitative and quantitative edges in military superiority. The U.S. will remain the only nation that can project its military power in any area of the world due to its uncontested supremacy on land, sea, and in air. Previously, no other country has had such unchallenged dominance of these areas. Established military presence in all regions of the globe cements U.S. influence everywhere — it allows for responsiveness and elasticity to deal with multiple contingencies simultaneously. It is this military supremacy, combined with an extraordinary economic capacity that gives the United States its unique advantage. Over time, the U.S. has achieved an ever-increasing amount of economic power with arguably more natural resources, developed industry and infrastructure, and intellectual capital than any other nation. These capabilities create extraordinary flexibility and large, untapped pools of power. In the instance of a peer competitor, the U.S. can increase its capabilities by devoting more resources to military primacy. Despite all the talk about the current economic crisis eroding our economic power, in 2008 our share of the world product, as documented by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), was 27 percent. In that year, the United States had a quarter of the world’s economic power and the world’s most competitive industries. Our power, shaped in part by our adaptability, will allow us to weather the crisis better than other nations. China and Russia have experienced worse economic slowdowns than the U.S., and leaders such as Gordon Brown and Angela Merkel are looking to the United States for more guidance through the recession. Declinists, proponents of the declinism theory, also point to the increasing deficit and the decline of the dollar. Neither is much of a problem for the United States. The dollar will remain the world’s reserve currency and we will serve as the lender of last resort for a long time to come. The federal budget deficit is fixable: increasing taxes and controlling costs can put the budget back on track. Increased spending during the Great Depression helped to solve the financial crisis of that time and prepared the U.S. for World War II, in a time when budget deficits were a larger percent of the GDP than now. The deficit lies partially outside of the United States’ control. China and Japan hold a large portion of the debt and are dependent on exports to the United States. They must continue purchasing dollars to ensure their currencies are weak against it, thereby maintaining competitive export potential. Indeed, globalization strengthens, not weakens, U.S. power. American universities attract the best minds from all over the world, creating the foundation for an innovative and adaptive society. We have remained the head of the world’s most popular political philosophy, democracy, which is widely viewed as the most legitimate form of leadership. Even powerful autocratic nations must at least pay lip service to democratic ideals such as voting and human rights. We also remain at the center of the world’s institutional system. The United States plays central roles in many world organizations, such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), the United Nations (UN), and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). As extensions of American ideology and values, they serve to enhance and channel U.S. authority. For example, the WTO has dispute mechanisms for facilitating free trade, which is consistent with American ideals and is the cornerstone for American economic growth. No other empire in history has had the advantages that multilateral institutions provide. Institutions also legitimize U.S. leadership. These mechanisms for global gov- 11
Change language