The way ahead: Global leadership or unilateral domination?

Transcription

1 AARMS Vol. 6, No. 2 (2007) SECURITY The way ahead: Global leadership or unilateral domination? ANNA BOROS Miklós Zrínyi National Defence University, Budapest, Hungary The aim of this article is to present the main concepts in Zbigniew Brzezinski s recently published book called The Choice: Global Domination or Global Leadership. The former National Security Advisor under President Carter tries to investigate how the United States should exercise its power and hegemony in alliance with the leading countries of the Western society in order to provide an efficient answer to the main global challenges and threats of the 21st century. In addition, he presents how the United States and the European Union should review and revitalize their co-operation as well as highlights the major strategic tasks a USA-led alliance should focus on. Introduction Brzezinski starts his analysis by stating that the United States currently is in a special situation as the country exercises a global hegemony unseen in history before. Although this hegemony will not last forever, but before it fades away, America should make proper choices as to how to make use of this power and influence, who the country should share them with and which ultimate goals they should be dedicated to. The answers to these questions determine whether an international consensus will develop, which as a consequence legitimates and reinforces US leadership, or the US will unilaterally dominate the international community. In case of a consensual global leadership, the USA will be a Superpower Plus; whereas, if America exercises global domination, it can only be considered as a Superpower Minus. Global leadership would entail global solidarity and sympathy while global domination would result in global solitude, widespread suspicion of American power and greater expenditure for America. Therefore, it is vitally important which choice the US will make and how it will determine the central purpose of its unprecedented hegemony. In order to become a Superpower Plus, a real global leader, the USA should capture and express the essential strategic challenge the country is confronted with and seek to mobilize the world against it. America can succeed only if this task is completed with a lot of clarity, moral force as well as comprehension of the needs and aspirations of its allies. Received: April 16, 2007 Address for correspondence: ANNA BOROS Miklós Zrínyi National Defence University P. O. Box 15, H-1581 Budapest, Hungary borosanna@hotmail.com

2 Brzezinski argues that the narrow focus on terrorism, even if it is identified as a war against terrorism with a global reach will not contribute to this effort. Although he defines terrorism as a brutal and morally outrageous strike against civilians, symbolic persons or physical objects to achieve a political effect he even paraphrases Clausewitz saying that terrorism is politics by other means he insists that the combat against terrorism with an ad-hoc coalition of like-minded partners cannot be the essential strategic challenge the US hegemony should be used for. His alternative approach to defining the USA s central strategic challenge is to focus more broadly on the global turmoil in its numerous regional and social manifestations and as a result lead an enduring and enlarging alliance of like-minded democracies. What he describes as global turmoil should be recognized as the basic strategic challenge of our times. It is usually very complex and manifests itself in a variety of ways such as mass poverty, social injustice, ethnic oppression, tribal conflicts and religious fundamentalism. Unlike terrorism, global turmoil is difficult to personalize since it does not rouse US people so much and it does not fit into the epic confrontation of good and evil. Therefore, it is not so politically captivating in the short run. An effective response to global turmoil requires major reliance on American power as well as the commitment from its allies. The USA can only achieve this if it transforms its power into the so-called co-optive hegemony. Brzezinski defines cooptive hegemony as a type of leadership exercised through shared conviction with enduring allies. Hence, the key element in a co-optive hegemony is a global community of shared interests. On the one hand, this global community is already spontaneously emerging due to globalization. On the other hand, this process requires deliberate efforts by the USA and the EU to bring together a broader binding and an institutionalized international cooperation. In this global community the USA should play the role of the responsible global leader, who has a sense of direction and who can mobilize others without dictating them. To be able to exercise a co-optive global leadership, Brzezinski suggests that the USA should: have a rational and balanced policy of self-protection; make an effort to pacify the more volatile regions of the globe; make an effort to engage the most vital and friendly parts of the world to contain and eliminate the sources of greatest dangers; recognize globalization as more than just an opportunity for trade and profit, but as a phenomenon with a deep moral dimension; foster a domestic political culture that is aware of the complex responsibilities in the era of global interdependence. 320 AARMS 6(2) (2007)

3 Furthermore, Brzezinski emphasizes that the USA can exercise global leadership only if the American public understands the interdependence between American national security and global security, the burdens of global primacy as well as the need for enduring democratic alliances. In this educational process, the president of the country plays a major role with significant responsibilities. As for the Atlantic relationship, it is vital that Europe and the USA develop a global partnership which is mutually complementary and increasingly binding. Such a partnership will help the USA become a Superpower Plus and will further unite the European Union. According to Brzezinski, Europe must realize that its security is even less separable from global security than that of America. This explains why it cannot be secure without America, why it cannot unite against America and why it cannot influence America without acting jointly with it. The USA, on the other hand, should not divide Europe, which is still America s most important strategic partner. In addition, a united Europe will increase the overall weight of the Atlantic community. However, when talking about the Atlantic Alliance, Brzezinski does not believe that it is possible to have a perfectly balanced partnership. He underlines that the demographically younger, more vigorous and politically more united USA will remain more dominant in the partnership. The real option for Europe therefore is not to try to have an equal weight with America or counterweight its superpower partner, but to become a partner of weighty influence in shaping shared global policy. In order to achieve this goal, both partners would need to have the willingness to act together and both should foster a spirit of accommodation. Moreover, Brzezinski even suggests that the restructuring of NATO s decision-making process should take an emerging political Europe more into account. To create a global strategic agenda, and consequently the possibility for the USA to exercise its global leadership role, the USA and the EU should be able to move from their basic concerns and narrow interests towards more global strategic roles and tasks. Both the military power and the financial resources are available, it is only the political will and the intention that are missing. Before this global strategic agenda is created, says Brzezinski, the USA and the EU should already focus on more concrete strategic tasks such as: continue EU/NATO enlargement; create a road map for the Palestine-Israeli peace and for Iraq s rehabilitation which would eventually help transform Arab societies in the region and reduce anti-american hostility; promote democracy in the Arab world by taking into account the historical and cultural traditions of Islam; AARMS 6(2) (2007) 321

4 deal with the volatile area of the new Global Balkans from the Persian Gulf to Xinjiang in cooperation with East Asia; create a structured security relationship with China and Japan. Finally, Brzezinski expresses his concerns over how the USA pursues globalization and its impact on security as well as on the global role which the country will acquire. He emphasizes that globalization should not disfranchise but empower poorer countries and that it should consider humane concerns, as well as economic and financial. Conclusion In my opinion, the book presents a very relevant topic, highlights very significant problems and raises issues that are currently in the focus of international attention and discussions. In addition, the author gives some advice and recommendations that I think should be seriously considered by political decision makers. Brzezinski presents two main scenarios about the international role the USA can play in its current state as a superpower. Personally, I find the concept as well as the terminology that is introduced in the book very original and relevant. It sounds very logical to make a difference between the two main roles the USA can play in the world: the consensual global leadership or the unilateral domination. I also find it very appropriate to define the country as a Superpower Plus, or a Superpower Minus, depending on the direction the administration decides to take. It is my impression that Brzezinski would prefer to see the USA focusing on broader international issues than those of the current administration, and therefore building a consensual global leadership. This would make the USA benefit from more solidarity, sympathy, co-operation, acceptance, and less financial burden. I found it very appropriate the way he defined terrorism by using the classic definition of war from Clausewitz. However, the strategy as he argues of such a Superpower as the USA cannot focus on this single item only. This is again obviously the choice of the current administration but according to Brezinski a much broader approach would need to be applied. Another new terminology he introduces is the so-called co-optive hegemony which would be based on a global community of shared interests, primarily between the EU and the USA. Here again, he touches upon a very important topic that has been a major issue in the transatlantic relationship since the end of the Cold War. The author emphasizes the role of Europe as the main international partner of the USA; it seems to me that the current tendency, however, may lead us to another conclusion. The USA recently has made a few statements in which it was clear that the American administration may not 322 AARMS 6(2) (2007)

5 consider Europe as the main ally any more. It has to be noted, however, that the USA is often criticized for such a cherry-picking approach to the allies. Finally, the author has to be commended for the very clear assessment of the transatlantic relationship, more precisely for the suggestion that Europe should try to strive for exercising more influence in this relationship but not to counterweight it. This is again a very common argument against the EU, or some European countries (e.g. France). As a conclusion, I would wholeheartedly recommend this book to anybody who wishes to learn more about the options the USA may have in the international and the transatlantic relations and their impact on global security. References BRZEZINSKI, Z. (2004): The Choice: Global Domination or Global Leadership. Basic Books. GUÉROT, U. (2005): The European Idea Meets US Reality. International Politik, Spring issue HODGE, C. C. ( ): Atlanticism and pax Americana, International Journal, Canadian Institute of International Affairs, Winter issue OWEN, D. (1992): Atlantic partnership or rivalry? In: H. BRANDON (Ed.), In Search of a New World Order. The Future of US-European Relations. Washington D.C. RAMET, S., C. INGEBRITSEN (Eds) (2002): Coming in from the Cold War. Changes in the US-European interactions since Rowman and Littlefield Publishers INC. STORMER, M. (2006): Les Etats-Unis, partenaires obliges de l Europe. Le Monde, 11 January WHITMAN, R. G. (2004): NATO, the EU and ESDP: An emerging division of labour? Contemporary Security Policy, AARMS 6(2) (2007) 323