Is it time to again be the leader of the free world?
COVID-19 has highlighted a number of trends and challenges that were festering before the pandemic hit — most especially global warming, terrorism, cyber warfare, as well as the rise of China, Russian aggression, a fraying European Union, and continuing turmoil in the Middle East.
In the face of this, we may choose to pursue the policies of the recent past or we can get busy in elaborating a more realistic strategy for the country going forward. We can continue to turn in upon ourselves, pursuing a self-destructive nationalism, or we can embrace these challenges as a catalyst for renewed global cooperation.
Most Americans want a cooperative foreign policy but are divided over what that means. It wasn’t that long ago there was a general political consensus on the appropriateness of America acting as the leader of the free world. Now that is less clear than at any time since the 1930s.
Yet, the COVID-19 pandemic highlights the interconnected nature of our world and the necessity of cooperation among states. In a world of growing complexity, the most connected states will be the most influential. The important policy choices for the next president is not about whether to get involved, but where and how to be involved.
So where do we go from here? Of one thing we can be sure: America can no longer dictate events as we sometimes believed we could. Power has become too disbursed for that.
Yet we remain in a better position than any other major country to mobi
lize coalitions to deal with our challenges as they arise.
In assessing the overall geopolitical balance going into 2021, the U.S. has several advantages that will persist despite the pandemic. The first is geography: We are surrounded by oceans and friendly neighbors.
A second advantage is energy: The shale oil and gas revolution has transformed the U.S. from an energy importer to a net exporter. And a commitment to alternative sources of energy is proceed
ing apace.
Third, we have a demographic advantage with our skilled work force. Fourth, America is at the forefront in the key technologies that will be required looking ahead. Fifth, our research universities continue to lead the world. Finally, deep and flexible capital markets make the dollar the dominant financial instrument in the global commons.
But to translate these advantages into positive results, we must reinvent the purpose and practice of American power, finding a balance between our ambitions and our limitations. Armed with a clear sense of priorities, the next administration will have to make some hard choices about America’s tools and terms of engagement around the world. How to do that?
For starters, we must recognize that a continuing fracturing of America’s domestic politics poses the greatest risk to the future of American global leadership. That is why American foreign policy must support domestic renewal. Smart foreign policy begins at home, with a strong democracy, society and economy.
The well-being of America’s workers ought to be the engine that drives our foreign policy. That will require a major national effort to rebuild our economy, revitalize our infrastructure, transform our education system and address the yawning divisions in American society.
Building a 21st century infrastructure is especially important. In so doing, we can put to work many of those most threatened by new technologies. Our trade policies should reflect these priorities.
Unless these challenges at home are dealt with, no amount of reengineering of our policy efforts abroad will matter.
Another major priority for a reinvented foreign policy involves dealing with the great global challenges out there — the pandemic, climate change, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the technological revolution. All of these problems directly affect the health, security and prosperity of Americans.
No single country can organize the world anymore as we were able to do after 1945. So this will necessitate international cooperation involving coalitions of like-minded states. It will also require a hard-nosed approach to reforming international institutions. To cite one example, a poorly funded, ineffectual World Health Organization needs to be revitalized.
We also need a Marshall Plan to combat COVID-19. Cascading waves of COVID-19 have been especially hard on poorer countries less able to cope. We should take the lead in creating and helping to underwrite a major new relief fund that is open to those countries most in need.
Yet another priority is our greatest geopolitical challenge: managing our relationship with China. How we behave toward one another will be crucial for world peace.
Take climate change, for example. Addressing climate change will not be possible without meaningful cooperation by both countries. That is why we must work with them, engaging Chinese leadership directly to bank down the fires of competition while defining the terms for coexistence.
While the United States will continue to hold many high cards, misguided policy decisions could cause it to play these cards poorly. Downplaying a commitment to alliances and international institutions would be one such misguided decision.
Finally, a more sensible balance is required between our military and nonmilitary techniques of statecraft. For that to happen, a re-commitment to a creative and agile diplomacy, headed up by a reinvigorated Department of State, will be essential.