THE LONELY SUPERPOWER + BULLY OF THE FREE WORLD [2 PAPERS] [ Samuel P + Wills, Garry Huntington] on *FREE* shipping on. HeinOnline — 78 Foreign Aff. 35 HeinOnline — 78 Foreign Aff. 36 HeinOnline — 78 Foreign Aff. 37 HeinOnline — 78 Foreign Aff. 38 5 He argues that the United States, the lone superpower, is in fact a “lonely The purpose of this paper is to examine Huntington’s argument more closely.

Author: Taubei Toshakar
Country: Sao Tome and Principe
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Software
Published (Last): 16 April 2016
Pages: 145
PDF File Size: 8.73 Mb
ePub File Size: 20.42 Mb
ISBN: 209-5-60007-861-1
Downloads: 91702
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Kajir

The Lonely Superpower

My wife and I deal with loss every day,” a victim’s father tweeted after comedian jokes about the massacre. Moreover, these public goods, by their very nature, are deemed to be “good” for whomever is out there consuming them. If Vietnam reprises its aggression against Cambodia, there is no compelling U. Indeed, the very ascendancy of American power predicted by the anti-declinist camp ten years ago has prompted the original renewalist, Samuel P.

It is most clearly evident in the history of the world since that Americans tell each other, a history that is undergirded by the “theory” that has been invented by American scholars to explain American global leadership-hegemonic stability theory.

This implies a diplomacy of global range, too. Too much militates against it: Little wonder that Americans raised on the idea that they are providing “international public goods” to a world that seems ungrateful should be concerned about the issue of “burden-sharing,” and how the allies of the United States tend to be able to devote more of their social wage to social welfare because the American treasury is burdened with the costs of paying for the various alliances it leads.

Sketching out the nature of a hyperpower and how it differs from a superpower is crucial for a consideration of Huntington’s argument about the future of world politics. According to this view, the political community established in the “New World” was to be different than that of the “Old,” that it was to be a “city upon a hill” as John Winthrop put it originally in the early 17th century.

First, while the power capacity of a political community may diminish with extreme rapidity, it generally takes a long period of time for the power capacity of communities to grow dramatically.

Brookings Institution, Pakistan is close to a nuclear capability, and Iraq and North Korea have been working on it. ComiXology Thousands of Digital Comics.

The brief sketches above suggest that in the post-Cold War era the United States has been taking such an approach to the protection and advancement of its interests. Schoppa, “Two-level games and bargaining outcomes: A process similar to human rights certification was also carried out in the area of drugs. The United States would clearly prefer a unipolar system in which it would be the hegemon It dominates in every sphere: But this does not mean the United States has to respond to every crisis around the world.


It had a monopoly on atomic weapons. The United States should be prepared to assert “American interests and values” anywhere in the world, unilaterally if londly. In the ten years afterthe United States has used tye, unilaterally or in concert with its allies, against a number of countries.

In the Cold War, by contrast, the United States was much more indulgent, much more forgiving, and much more careful about its behaviour towards many others in the international system.

It meant a forward deployment of troops and equipment to Central Europe that by itself consumed 29 percent of all U.

Rather, he suggests that the system we are in now is better described as a “uni-multipolar” system, one that leaves all participants discontented and seeking change. Or would it retreat into the isolationism that followed World War I?

Amazon Music Stream millions of songs. References to “freedom” and “democratic ideals”–justifications for U. Importantly, however, no one is content with the present system. State University of New York Press ; draft available at http: And they are right: A view of the world grounded in a “public goods” approach encourages a particular view of others in the international system as little more than “free riders”-in other words, those in other countries who enjoy the security created by the United States, enjoy the thhe benefits of an open and liberal global economy sustained by American leadership, but who do not have to pay the attendant costs.

South African Political Studies Association. Amazon Advertising Find, attract, and engage customers. Bound to be Hyper? Huntington on the New Polarity Reflecting on the nature of world politics at the end of the s, Huntington argued that none of supepower traditional ways of characterizing systems of international relations holds true today.

There’s a problem loading this menu right now. Lonely Superpower or Unapologetic Superpowwer NATO Issues One could point to both the American refusal to consider the possibility of appointing a European-and more particularly, a French candidate-to NATO’s Southern command as hujtington example of unilaterally imposing Washington’s will on the alliance.

As a result, the American te never superopwer the chance to make an unhurried decision about their degree of involvement around the world. And when the data are organized like this, the trendline is ominously clear: In seeking to advance its “war on drugs,” the United States government engages in a program of “certifying” other countries lonrly the western hemisphere, assessing the degree to which they are complying with American definitions of anti-drug activities.


The world, Huntington implies, can be arranged as a hierarchy, with the apex being occupied by those of “superpower” status; “great powers” are ranked immediately underneath, followed by significant regional powers-and then the vast majority of middle-sized countries, smaller powers, and microstates forming the base of the pyramid.

The Lonely Superpower

Who would disagree with Ignacio Ramonet, the director of Le Monde diplomatique, who in described the global superpoeer of the United States with only the slightest touch of hyperbole: One small but illustrative example of the single-mindedness of American efforts to protect their interests is to be found in Washington’s approach to Canadian cultural policies.

I suggest that while Huntington’s description of the contemporary system as a “uni-multipolar” system is not unreasonable, the longer-term implications that Huntington draws from it cannot be supported. He argues that the contemporary international system cannot appropriately be described as unipolar, since that suggests the existence of one single dominant power and many small powers, and there are of course a number of “major” powers in contemporary world politics-Russia, China, Japan, and the European “majors,” together with a number of smaller but no less important regional powers, such as India, Brazil, tbe South Africa.

Not only does the United States retain the massive nuclear arsenal it developed during the Cold War, but it also remains suprpower only country in the world with a truly global airlift capability. For central to Huntington’s argument is huntingtob idea that the United States will eventually become an “ordinary” major power, little different than any of the other major powers in the contemporary international system.

Patrick Buchanan, the conservative scold and former Reagan speechwriter, speaks for the Republican Party’s old Fortress America wing. And the United States itself remains the most popular destination for immigration. This is how international politics is widely taught in the United States, and central to the understanding that most graduates of American universities appear to take with them into the real world beyond their university studies.

This is by no means unique: From Superpower to Hyperpower As the foregoing synopsis suggests, Huntington analyzes both the present international system and its future shape using a standard division that sees the world of world politics as involving a range of powers of different size.