In the drop down menu under this heading I go over each continent and discuss the issues of that continent and how American leadership can help to resolve the situation and make the world a safer and better place. But before you check out those, consider these thoughts below.
“We have no choice, we people of the United States, as to whether or not we shall play a great part in the world. That has been determined to us by fate, by the march of events. We have to play that part. All that we can decide is whether we shall play it well or ill.” Theodore Roosevelt, May 13th, 1903
Whether we like it or not (personally I do!), particularly since the end of World War II, America is looked to for leadership around the world. It is in our best interests therefore, both economically and morally to be the best leaders we can be, and the first job of any leader is to lead by example.
In anything we undertake in the international arena, we must always be willing to ‘put our money where our mouth is’, and ‘walk the talk’, with the full realization that words and deeds have impact on others.
This position of world leader or being the dominant power or whatever you want to call it, is rare and special and does not come back once you relinquish it.
The leading civilizations and countries throughout history have never regained their top spot once it was lost…..Ancient Mesopotamia, Ancient Egypt, the Aztecs, the Ancient Greeks, Persians, the Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire, Portugal, Holland, Spain, France, and England, all were once the top power, primarily due to their armies and navies, and all eventually fell from power.
Our goal should be to hold onto our position for as long as we possibly can, and in the long view of history, our current leadership spot of 75+ years is a drop in the bucket compared to the multiple century long reign of prior world leaders.
Modern day Americans do not remember what life was like for our republic before we were the top power in the world. Prior to World War II, the US dollar was not the reserve currency of the world. English has only in recent decades become the international language of choice for diplomacy and international business…..it used to be French for centuries.
We take for granted that we can travel the globe and people will be able to understand us for the most part and are willing to take our money to pay for things.
We take for granted that computers and technology around the globe use English and English keyboards.
We take for granted that if we speak, the rest of the world will not only give us the courtesy of listening, but also take our thoughts and positions into strong consideration when formulating their policies and decisions.
Do you think for a minute that prior to any of the wars of the 1800’s, World War I or II that any world leaders of France, Germany, England, Italy, Russia, Austria Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, Japan, or China gave even the slightest thought to what America might think of their actions before they took them?
The bottom line is that we must rededicate ourselves to stewarding our leadership position in the world with serious, sober, and deliberate thoughts, words, and actions, lest we squander it at the risk of never getting it back again.
We have to stop saying and doing outrageous things that embolden our enemies and upset our allies. It is one thing to believe in “America First”, but an entirely different thing to openly go around spouting it off in everyone’s faces.
Of course the goal of any nation in the international arena is to better improve their country’s standing. To question that is to question the patriotism of the leaders, and again to me that is yet another symptom of the 2 party system, where people from one party question the patriotism and competency of the members of the other party.
Furthermore, events in the international arena do not operate on American election cycles, and in fact can take many years if not decades to be resolved, and they require a unified and continuously stable approach from successive American administrations to help bring them to closure.
One of the quickest ways we will relinquish our leadership role in the world is to allow our divisive two party politics to infect and destroy our international relations by flip flopping every 4 to 8 years between competing ideologies and worldviews.
It is toxic and lethal to our leadership abilities to have treaties negotiated and agreed upon by prior administrations that are then canceled by the next administration. When administrations negotiate on behalf of our country, they are doing exactly that. They are not negotiating on behalf of a single party, and it is not the job of the other party once in power to go back on the hard work and effort that the prior administration put forth, purely out of spite.
Many people in the world of political science and international affairs try to use labels, just like others do in domestic politics, in an effort to define if someone is more inclined towards international organizations, or going it alone, or bilateral deals, an idealist or a pragmatic disciple of “realpolitik”, balances of power, and a whole host of other traditional terms.
I look at them all as equally viable levers to use to achieve desired results. There are times that nations must work together collectively, there are times that bilateral efforts make sense, and there are times that a nation must act on its own.
What makes any nation successful on the international stage is knowing when to use which lever or tool and when not to within the framework of clear principles that the nation espouses.
The guiding principles of American foreign policy will always be rooted in our national experience and a projection of our values supporting life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. To me, that means supporting fair trade, freedom from oppression (meaning doing everything we can to prevent and end wars, foster democracy wherever and whenever possible), advocating for human rights and equality, and helping to conserve and sustain our planet for future generations’ happiness.
Lastly, let me leave you with these words from Senator Fulbright in the 1960’s about Vietnam as I feel they are still highly relevant to what our current outlook should be on world events:
“I also think that the great countries, especially this country, is quite strong enough to engage in a compromise without losing its standing in the world and without losing its prestige as a great nation. On the contrary, I think it would be one of the greatest victories for us in our prestige if we could be ingenuous enough and magnanimous enough to bring about some kind of a settlement of this particular struggle”.
Perry Waag 