Column 118

Here's to a globalization-centric grand strategy for America

Americans suspect grand motives behind foreign policy. We sense our innate exceptionalism as the world's oldest and most successful multinational economic and political union, but we're reluctant about spreading that example, believing it smacks of imperialism.

As a result, most of America's strategic choices are driven by the decisions of others. Our preference for reaction over initiative now blinds us to the enormous strategic opportunity staring us in the face -- namely, the consolidation of globalization's rapid advance in the form of a radically expanded world middle class.

Read on at KnoxNews.
Read on at Scripps Howard.

Comments

[michal shapiro]

I wonder what the chances are that the right people are reading this.....It's a time of grave concern. And Russia is only exacerbating the situation re naval tactics with Venezuela.

[Bob L]

Tom:Hopefully you and Steve will be successful in getting the opportunity to brief both presidential candidates on 'Development-in-a Box' and your briefings that economics leads politics as long as there is reasonable security and rule of law.

[Louis Heberlein]

It's possible that Russia and America will be the appropriate opponents to keep each other engaged in a transformational globalization rather than fold into conservatism due to the long burden of the effort.

There has been a long term effort to establish the technical basis for a transformational globalization by DOD, NIST and institutions like MIT. That effort involved international partnership efforts for international digital technical data manufacturing standards, modernized electricity generation and transmission, nanotechnology and extraordinary technology advances in communications. Other stuff too.

The domestic economic shocks may lay the ground work for a domestic and international globalization transformation.

BUT ... the public and general media silence is deafening. It's nice to have the Washington, industry and academic elite get the message, but the general public needs to be more aware about the problem/opportunity situation. Web sites and a few hundred thousand books involving an 'insider' audience will not move the game along fast enough.

[VoteWithTroops.com]

This is a good article Tom.

I share Cory Markson's confusion on your support of Obama. In comments to your "Clarification on my posts about Palin", you responded to Cory's comment-of-dismay and you said "I still, however, believe he'll (Obama) be more conservative in his foreign policy and that America needs that now."

So you supported Bush's big-bang removal of Saddam and you are a free trade supporter. But Obama did not support the liberation of Iraq, still says it was wrong for us to do, and takes a trade-protectionist pose, much more than McCain does.

No wonder we are confused. We are fans of yours Dr. Barnett. In your response-to-Cory-quote above you state we need to be more conservative in our foreign policy right now, meaning militarily (not regarding free trade). Obama fills the military isolationist part of this but not the free trade / globalization part.

It took me awhile to compartmentalize the Russian overrun of Georgia, which I now accept a little better. But how much agression toward our democratic allies can we tolerate while claiming to be the rules set implementer or enforcer (remaining a world leader)? We need democratic allies, don't we? Please let us know when you switch to supporting McCain (which we still hold out hope for :-).