Democracy Promotion for Realism, Liberalism, Constructivism - Essay Example

Democracy Promotion for Realism, Liberalism, Constructivism, and Obama One of the main components of U.S. foreign policy is democracy promotion. Democracy promotion matters to realism, liberalism, and constructivism, depending on how they see U.S.-led democracy promotion’s impacts on the international political system. These theoretical approaches also vary in how they understand the difference between projection of value and projection of power. Projecting value refers to projecting the values of democracy (i.e. equal human rights and freedoms), while projection of American power refers to using democracy to enforce American values on other states for the main purpose of acquiring power through cultural hegemony, which acquires political and economic hegemony. Realism sees U.S. democracy promotion as suspicious because it can upset the balance of power; liberalism welcomes democracy promotion that results to an economically interdependent international society; and constructivism sees democracy promotion as a policy of creating a hegemonic culture that can result to social structures of anarchy. Obama should stick to non-violent, economic-liberalism-oriented, cultural-autonomy-sensitive means of democracy promotion because the people in non-democratic states should be the ones leading democratic changes, not third-party state interventions, in order to avoid the potential repercussions of violent democracy promotion that realism and constructivism describe. Realism believes that democracy promotion is suspicious because states cannot be certain of the true intentions of democracy-promoting states and because the existence of a democratic international system is impossible (“Realism Introduction” 8, 15). Realism does not think that democracy can be trusted because it is someone else’s democracy. The U.S. is not only projecting values because its democracy promotion is projecting U.S. power too. At the same time, promoting democracy internationally is hardly attainable because there is no government authority that can enforce an international form of democracy (“Realism Introduction” 8). In particular, if the U.S. promotes democracy in the Middle East, and the projection of values can undermine the power structures in autocratic states, the latter would want to reduce American influence on cultural values and political systems. Others might create alliances to engage in war with more democratic states. The result could be violent conflicts where weak autocratic states attack weaker autocratic or more democratic states, in an attempt to block America’s democracy promotion in the region. Liberalism promotes democracy that could lead to a strong, economically-interdependent international society. Economic liberalism believes that trade and economic interdependence can build peace (“Liberalism Introduction” 6). U.S. democratic values that positively impact the motivation for regional and international economic agreements for involved states are needed to establishing interdependency. If economies are closely linked, nations would think twice before going to war. In addition, democracy is good if it results to free flow of accurate information across international organizations (“Interdependence and International Organizations” 13). With equal access to the same kinds of information, suspicions against each other could drops, trust can build up, and economic interdependence can become stronger. If the U.S. promotes democracy, including democracy in international organizations, it can be good for the economic and political wellbeing of the international political system. Constructivism focuses more on how U.S. democracy promotion can create a foreign policy that develops an American hegemonic culture, which may result to social structures of anarchy. Constructivism asserts that states take action on material and social settings, with emphasis on the latter (“Changing Structures” 5). Norms create and constrict the identities of states actors (“Changing” 11). They provide states the means to understand their interests (“Changing Structures” 11). If the U.S. promotes democracy to other nations, it projects values in ways that project power too. Democracy contains the norms that build and change identities. People who observe American democratic values and follow American democratic systems may soon have American perspectives, including American interests (“Changing Structures” 11). Anarchy would happen because some actors in the state would find the American norms as illegitimate (“Explaining War and Peace” 12). This can create violent organizations in the state that may act through violent regional and international activities too. Constructivism is wary of a hegemonic American culture that can have negative social structural effects. Since there are negative consequences of American democracy promotion, the advice given to Obama is to balance the different ideas of defensive realism, liberalism, and constructivism that can lead to peace and productive means to manage violent conflicts across the world. Instead of preventive wars (Ferguson, 2011), preventive coalitions are preferred under defensive realism. Some of the past U.S. presidents decided to go to wars that promoted American economic, ideological, and political interests. An instance is the Gulf War in 1991. The U.S. led in fighting Iraq because of its oil interests in Kuwait. The problem with an offensive strategy is that it creates perceptions that the U.S. wants to project power, and not merely values, in its democracy promotion. The impact would be the rise of anti-U.S. states, including fundamentalist groups and organizations. Obama should follow the aspect of defensive realism that is useful in preserving peace. He can lead the signing of treaties where all states agree that they should not pursue offensive military strategies anymore because they do not want global hegemony. Obama could remove fear of U.S. democracy promotion, if the fear for U.S. hegemony is removed. Besides defensive liberalism, Obama should take a page from liberalism where he would use foreign policy to promote non-violent, economic means of democracy promotion. Economic liberalism is about strengthening economic interdependencies. Obama can push for economic sanctions and offer better economic ties with conflict-ridden, autocratic states. He can also help national governments deal with fundamentalist groups through offering economic packages that leaders could not easily discount. These economic programs are forms of political power already, which organizations could appreciate, especially if it would allow them to become legitimate in the long run. Moreover, in promoting economic liberalism, Obama can help provide support that can lead to the development of what Ferguson (2011) believed as the core components of Western ascendancy: competition, science, property rights, medicine, consumer society, and work ethic. For example, the U.S. can offer services in boosting these components through inter-departmental and inter-educational collaborations. Economic liberalism can offer peaceful ways of solving long-standing conflicts. Besides liberalism, constructivism can also help reduce the negative perceptions and effects of U.S. democracy promotion through greater social interaction, so that the people themselves from autocratic states would learn how and why democracy is good and how they could integrate it into their social and cultural systems. The idea is not to project values in a superior and unilateral way, but to promote cultural discussions and social collaborations. Obama should have foreign policies that engage people from different countries to know one another on a cultural basis and to build common social connections. These common social connections can lead to a more international social identity where people would not see each other as enemies or rivals, but as friends. Constructivism reduces anarchic social structures because the U.S. does not force its democracy on others, but allows the latter to see and redefine them according to their national interests and cultural orientations? Realism questions American democracy for its power-projecting goals, while constructivism opposes cultural hegemony because it is socially destructive in the international setting too. Liberalism is more hopeful of democracy, as long as it promotes unity and interdependency among international organizations, which would build peaceful states. Obama should have policies that promote economic and cultural interactions and build economic and cultural interdependencies without diluting the national cultures/sub-cultures of other nations/groups. These peaceful ways of promoting democracy can serve during times of war and prevent future conflicts as well. Defensive realism, economic liberalism, and constructivism offer solutions that can altogether promote democracy with fewer international-relations consequences. References “Balance of Power.” “Changing Structures.” “Explaining War and Peace.” Ferguson, N. (2011). Civilization: The West and the rest. New York, N.Y.: Penguin Books. “Interdependence and International Organizations.” “Liberalism Introduction.” “Realism Introduction.” “Strands of Liberal Thinking.” Read More