Related News
Home » Opinion » Foreign Views
US adopts new pragmatism, realism
By Jonathan Holslag |
April 21, 2009, Tuesday
|
Print Edition
Print Edition
PRESIDENT Barack Obama's first appearances outside North America - in London, Strasbourg, Prague, and Istanbul - galvanized world attention.
But what that trip singularly failed to do was paper-over a startling fact: the "Washington Consensus" about how the global economy should be run is now a thing of the past.
The question now is what is likely to replace it.
In pursuit of national economic stability, the Obama administration is clearly moving towards the kind of government intervention that China has been promoting over the past two decades.
In this model, the government, while continuing to benefit from the international market, retains power over the economy's "commanding heights" through strict control over the financial sector, restrictive government procurement policies, guidance for research and development in the energy sector, and selective curbs on imports of goods and services.
Rather than obsessing about elections, the United States now seeks to build pragmatic alliances to buttress its economic needs.
This realism is more than a reversal of the neo-conservative muscle-flexing of the George W. Bush years.
It is an attempt by a declining power to use its restrained capabilities in a more economical way.
For example, in times of crisis it is no shame for a government to be mercantilist, but by behaving in this way, the US has lost the moral high ground as a champion of free trade.
America's new pragmatism is also the consequence of a process of "reverse socialization."
Over the past two decades, the US and its European allies believed that they could inculcate the rest of the world with their economic and political principles.
The majority of developing countries now actively embrace multilateral bodies as part of their development strategies.
As we move from a unipolar international order to one with multiple regional powers, realism should allow them to vie for influence while keeping the costs as low as possible.
The result will be a new concert of powers, tied together by their fixation with national economic growth and the objective of discouraging others from causing instability that risks intervention.
Realism will give the US more maneuverability in the short term, but it will have to sacrifice some of its soft power to achieve this.
Whether America is able to strengthen its global influence in the future will depend not so much on its moral esteem, but on the extent to which it succeeds in revamping its economy and forging new alliances. The same will apply for other powers.
(Jonathan Holslag is head of research of the Brussels Institute of Contemporary China Studies. Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2009. www.project-syndicate.org)`
But what that trip singularly failed to do was paper-over a startling fact: the "Washington Consensus" about how the global economy should be run is now a thing of the past.
The question now is what is likely to replace it.
In pursuit of national economic stability, the Obama administration is clearly moving towards the kind of government intervention that China has been promoting over the past two decades.
In this model, the government, while continuing to benefit from the international market, retains power over the economy's "commanding heights" through strict control over the financial sector, restrictive government procurement policies, guidance for research and development in the energy sector, and selective curbs on imports of goods and services.
Rather than obsessing about elections, the United States now seeks to build pragmatic alliances to buttress its economic needs.
This realism is more than a reversal of the neo-conservative muscle-flexing of the George W. Bush years.
It is an attempt by a declining power to use its restrained capabilities in a more economical way.
For example, in times of crisis it is no shame for a government to be mercantilist, but by behaving in this way, the US has lost the moral high ground as a champion of free trade.
America's new pragmatism is also the consequence of a process of "reverse socialization."
Over the past two decades, the US and its European allies believed that they could inculcate the rest of the world with their economic and political principles.
The majority of developing countries now actively embrace multilateral bodies as part of their development strategies.
As we move from a unipolar international order to one with multiple regional powers, realism should allow them to vie for influence while keeping the costs as low as possible.
The result will be a new concert of powers, tied together by their fixation with national economic growth and the objective of discouraging others from causing instability that risks intervention.
Realism will give the US more maneuverability in the short term, but it will have to sacrifice some of its soft power to achieve this.
Whether America is able to strengthen its global influence in the future will depend not so much on its moral esteem, but on the extent to which it succeeds in revamping its economy and forging new alliances. The same will apply for other powers.
(Jonathan Holslag is head of research of the Brussels Institute of Contemporary China Studies. Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2009. www.project-syndicate.org)`
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 沪ICP证：沪ICP备05050403号-1
- |
- 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120180004
- |
- 网络视听许可证：0909346
- |
- 广播电视节目制作许可证：沪字第354号
- |
- 增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-20120012
Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
