StudentShare
Contact Us
Sign In / Sign Up for FREE
Search
Go to advanced search...
Free

Soft Power and US Foreign Policy - Research Paper Example

Cite this document
Summary
The paper "Soft Power and US Foreign Policy" tells that multilateral cooperation helps build good standing in the international arena by improving the American image and reassuring other states about its behaviour and goals. It is crucial as a confidence-building measure…
Download full paper File format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER97.5% of users find it useful
Soft Power and US Foreign Policy
Read Text Preview

Extract of sample "Soft Power and US Foreign Policy"

Here Should the U.S. emphasize multilateral over unilateral initiatives in foreign policy? PRO: Yes, the U.S. should emphasize multilateral over unilateral initiatives because… 1. Multilateral cooperation help build good standing in international arena by improving the American image and reassuring other states about its behavior and goals. It is crucial as a confidence-building measure. 2. The country can achieve more in its foreign policy by ensuring more cooperative states such as in the area of economic and security/defense. 3. Multilateral policies assume the mantle of legitimacy since they have international support, hence, strengthening foreign policy. 4. Many important international institutions require multilateral cooperation. 5. Multilateral initiatives allows for more alliances. CONS: No, the U.S. should NOT emphasize multilateral over unilateral initiatives in foreign policy. 1. The U.S. may have a disadvantage in multilateral negotiations because some countries outstrip the American influence in many consensus-oriented fora such as the ASEAN, Asean Regional Forum and APEC. 2. Some of the benefits of multilateralism can be achieved in through other strategies such as bilateral agreements, which sometimes could be more forceful and effective. 3. It is less decisive in addressing immediate threats or issues that need immediate attention. The dominant opinion domestically and internationally is that the United States is better off pursuing a multilateral approach to its foreign policy instead of unilateralism. This is exactly what is being pursued by the current Obama administration. For example, in the current civil war happening in Libya, the US is working with the North Atlantic Territory Organization (NATO) and the Arab League in order to best solve the crisis. When several airstrikes were finally launched against Moammar Gaddhafi’s military installations, they were done within the auspices of NATO and were explicitly projected as international efforts with the French or the British, possibly taking the lead. American policymakers are careful to avoid the failures of the previous administrations in its foreign policies, particularly that which concerned the unilateral invasion of Iraq, including the policies that came to constitute the American War on Terror. The confidence-building capability of multilateral initiatives has been demonstrated by Japan – a state now held in high esteem by most of Asia – after its much derided status during the Second World War. Through its strategy, it was able to achieve a kind of diplomatic influence that sometimes surpasses that of the US. For example, through the years, Japan has cultivated strong economic relationships with member countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nation (ASEAN). Multilateralism’s benefit for Japan is quite clear. Today, the country has two major East Asian multilateral foreign and security policy options: the first is the ASEAN/ARF structure, which are now consisted of most of the states in Southeast Asia, South Asia and East Asia.1 Then, there was also the case of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which the first Bush administration encouraged and ratified under President Clinton’s watch. This initiative to engage Latin America, wrote Horwitz, helped redirect the foreign policies of thirty-four Western Hemisphere states in favor of closer political and economic ties.2 This engagement also facilitated the pursuit of common goals that led to the solution of common problems such as illegal drugs and immigration. Engaging other states and international institutions makes an initiative legitimate or, at least, provide a semblance of it that might otherwise be perceived as narrow political/military/economic interests of the US. According to Parmar, the popular critique against the recent Bush administration was that it had alienated the world by “by-passing international institutions, flouting international law and norms, and disregarding the interests and opinion of states.3 Anjali emphasized that the War on Terror has proven the importance of multilateralism because although the decisive battles in Iraq were largely the product of unilateral US military power, much of the success that has been achieved was through broad multilateral cooperation on a number of lower profile fronts such as intelligence sharing and economic sanction.4 The current administration is promising to repair the damage done by stating that the US would lead in the global arena but at the same listen to other states, highlighting “global solutions” to issues and problems as well as in advancing the American interest.5 Many important world organizations are also multilateral in character – the United Nations, the World Trade Organizations and NATO, among others. With globalization, the significance is magnified a hundredfold. This is demonstrated in the way China is fast catching up with the US by cultivating multilateral relationships with many states, earning several technological, economic and political advantages in the process. If the United States loses ground in this arena, it will risk being isolated, with states ganging up on America in trade, politics, defense, and a number of other areas. The previous argument underpins the last argument that highlights how multilateralism encourages more and stronger alliances. The fact that three or more states are included in multilateral negotiations, they encourage the reinforcement of relationship among the member states. Tien and Cheng expressed this particular importance militarily when they said, “multilateral security mechanism provide additional opportunities for cooperation and constructive dialogue.”6 Meanwhile, there are also those in policy circles that downplay the importance of multilateral initiatives in achieving foreign policy objectives. One of the reasons cited is that the U.S. maybe is at a disadvantage in this area. Japan is a case in point. The country has long thrived in consensus-oriented fora due to the Japanese financial dues and aid to many countries and even to world bodies such as the UN. According to Green, Japan’s tactical attention to this strategy allowed itself to exert influence, with the economic-driven influence combined with the web of contacts and consultations that the army of Japanese diplomats, politicians, business envoys and scholars have established through the years.7 Then, there is also the point raised in some sectors that bilateral agreements can be more effective than multilateral initiatives. For example, there is the case about the difficulty in ensuring international cooperation, wherein some countries can just free-ride on the agreement or violate the terms easily. According to Naya et al., bilateral agreements are better because it eliminates free-rider behavior; disputes can be resolved without disrupting the entire fabric of international relations; that they provide faster adjudication; and, allow parties to focus on a wide array of issues specific to the relationship as opposed to multilateral agreements that tend to be limited in dimension and have very little teeth.8 Finally, there is also the argument being raised with regards to the foot-dragging that often occurs in multilateral initiatives. Excellent examples in this regard are international agencies that, by their very nature, rely on persuasion and consensus-building.9 The time-consuming process is supposedly enough to justify why multilateralism is not always the more effective strategy especially when the need for swift and decisive action is called for, such as in responding to terrorist threats. As this paper has outlined, the benefits of multilateral initiatives far outweigh the advantages offered by unilateralism. After the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the U.S. we already have experienced pursuing a foreign policy that preferred the latter strategy. The result, however, was close to being a disaster. The American image and standing in the global stage have been damaged significantly. With this in mind, it has become imperative for the U.S. to engage other countries in its foreign policy strategy. There is a need for confidence building and more subtle ways to advance our interests than just exclusively flexing our muscles, which unfortunately alienated us from the rest of the world just recently. References Anjali, Ghosh. India’s Foreign Policy. New Delhi: Pearson Education India, 2009. Cooney, Kevin. Japan's foreign policy since 1945. New York: M.E. Sharpe, 2007. Falco, Mathea. Rethinking international drug control: new directions for U.S. policy : report of an Independent Task Force. Washington, DC: Council on Foreign Relations, 1997. Green, Michael. Japan's reluctant realism: foreign policy challenges in an era of uncertain power. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003. Horwitz, Betty. The Transformation of the Organization of American States: A Multilateral Framework for Regional Governance. London: Anthem Press, 2010. Naya, Seiji, Sandhu, Kernial, Plummer, Michael and Akrasanee, Narongchai. ASEAN-U.S. initiative: assessment and recommendations for improved economic relations: joint final report. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 1989. Parmar, Inderjeet. Soft power and US foreign policy: theoretical, historical and contemporary perspectives. New York: Taylor & Francis, 2010. Tien, Hung-mao and Cheng, Tun-jen. The security environment in the Asia-Pacific. New York: M.E. Sharpe, 2000. Notes Read More
Cite this document
  • APA
  • MLA
  • CHICAGO
(“Should the U.S. emphasize multilateral over unilateral initiatives in Research Paper”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.org/family-consumer-science/1413954-should-the-us-emphasize-multilateral-over
(Should the U.S. Emphasize Multilateral over Unilateral Initiatives in Research Paper)
https://studentshare.org/family-consumer-science/1413954-should-the-us-emphasize-multilateral-over.
“Should the U.S. Emphasize Multilateral over Unilateral Initiatives in Research Paper”, n.d. https://studentshare.org/family-consumer-science/1413954-should-the-us-emphasize-multilateral-over.
  • Cited: 0 times

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF Soft Power and US Foreign Policy

Why is so much expected of soft power these days

The first part of this paper analyzes the theory of soft power and the second part of this paper, analyzes the rise of soft power and identifies why so much is expected of soft power these days.... soft power is defined as the use of persuasion through appeal and attraction rather than through coercive techniques.... Why is So Much Expected of soft power these Days?... soft power is defined as the use of persuasion through appeal and attraction rather than through coercive techniques....
12 Pages (3000 words) Essay

U.S. foreign policy

It is an observation that foreign policy of the US plays a crucial role in functions and operations of different countries around the globe, and this has been the reason of significant importance of different aspects of us foreign policy in international media and research.... This paper is a similar attempt to analyze one of the major stakeholders of us foreign policy: public.... In particular, the paper includes discussion and analysis of the perspective as whether public opinion matters in the decision-making process of us foreign policy or not....
6 Pages (1500 words) Essay

Counterterrorism Grand Strategy

Public policy Perspective of Counterterrorism Much counterterrorism policies are expressed in prevention terms and not as a precautionary measure.... In enhancing these policies, most governments preclude organizations from being able to gain certain political achievements such as receiving support from a foreign country....
6 Pages (1500 words) Essay

Energy Power as a Soft Weapon in Resurgent Russia's Foreign Policy

The paper 'Energy Power as a Soft Weapon in Resurgent Russia's foreign policy' presents energy opportunities of the self-assertive foreign policy of the superpower ruled by post-Soviet security and military elites that have internalized the jingoistic values of the Russian Empire and the USSR.... The interests of the Russian energy sector and the foreign policy goals of the Russian states are not only interrelated but also closely intertwined....
7 Pages (1750 words) Coursework

United States and the Neo-Gramscian Perspectives

The opportunity here for the us rests on the collective fear of a collapse in the international system.... Levantrosser and Perotti (2004) have come up with a name for the American hegemony, calling it a minimalist hegemony where a semblance of power is maintained, one that is challenged on all fronts.... This paper will cover the theoretical discussions on the power structure, the declinist school of thought, and the concepts of unipolarity and multipolarity....
15 Pages (3750 words) Essay

US Foreign Policy

This paper "us foreign policy" is an attempt to analyze one of the major stakeholders of us foreign policy: public.... In particular, the paper includes discussion and analysis of the perspective as to whether public opinion matters in the decision-making process of us foreign policy or not.... It is an observation that foreign policy of the United States plays a crucial role in functions and operations of different countries around the globe, and this has been the reason of significant importance of different aspects of us foreign policy in international media and research....
8 Pages (2000 words) Case Study

Counterterrorism Grand Strategy

The author takes into account the public policy perspective of counterterrorism, international relations perspective of counterterrorism grand strategy, economic, and communication perspectives.... In enhancing these policies, most governments preclude organizations from being able to gain certain political achievements such as receiving support from a foreign country....
7 Pages (1750 words) Essay

Has Globalisation Made Soft Power More Important Than Hard Power

Globalization made states re-examine the ways they put into practice their soft power and hard power capabilities.... For a state to use hard power, it does not have to be among the major players within the geopolitical scene as for instance to date, North Korea and Iran remain to be some of the threats to peace not just due to being powerful nations but due to their attempts at amassing military power and the possibility of its reckless use.... The paper "Has Globalisation Made soft power More Important Than Hard Power" discusses the application of soft and hard power within the context of a globalized international community....
8 Pages (2000 words) Coursework
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.
Contact Us