March 6, 2008

America and Globalization: Strategy for a New Century

Tomorrow’s all-inclusive global strategy must, apart from the aforementioned challenges and promotions of democratic regimes, address the consequences of successful rampant globalization.

When I look ahead, attempting to ascertain the likely challenges America will face in the coming century, I note another, not so apparent test for U.S. hegemony, as we know it, one that may not be as immediately critical as, for example, homeland security, or the war on terror.

A world without terrorists and autocrats is desirable however, owing to an impending explosion of economic, population and income growth, global consumption, energy utilization, resource competition, unbound market activity and investment flows, as facilitated by the ‘G’ word, the United States will be compelled to focus on the bigger picture or face diminished relevance.

The ‘G’ word my friends is globalization, that remarkable phenomenon born in the boardrooms of America’s Trans-national’s; that is was a concept exported by America warrants some responsibility on its part in terms of growth management. Tomorrow’s all-inclusive global strategy must, apart from the aforementioned challenges and promotions of democratic regimes, address the consequences of successful rampant globalization.

Moreover, here is why, it is estimated that the world’s population shall grow by 50 percent by mid century, with the opportunities provided by globalization continuing at current growth levels we will witness dramatic rises in world income and consumption. Nevertheless, the figures deceive; in the west, the growth will be only half that forecast for the non-west, meaning that disposable incomes will grow twice as fast in the non-west over the first half of this century. For U.S. policymakers and strategists, non-Western economic activity of such proportions will present new challenges of a kind never previously addressed.

Washington can either approach the emerging economic realities as a threat or alternatively, be smart and see the opportunity. The latter shall call for a recalibration of interaction through positive leadership and effective dialogue. The world followed America’s lead in the past and will welcome further guidance in future; given its historical connections to globalization, any less will be viewed as an abandonment of duty. When America is percieved as having lost its way, it makes for a more uncertain world.

What do you think...

8 comments:

WomanHonorThyself said...

When America is percieved as having lost its way, it makes for a more uncertain world.
..Otto..youre spot on..if only we had the courage of our convictions though....!

Tapline said...

Otto, I'm too old to watch this globalization. I see that as releasing soverignty. Perhaps I am wrong, but I see the powers that be trying to merge nations as the EU. They are loosing their individual nation status, it will come slowly until its done and somone else will be making decisions heretofor done by an individual nation,because it will be done for the good of all not for the individual nation...Maybe I am mixing the two terms, but thats how I see it and I ramble.....stay well......

Aurora said...

Otto, like Tapline, I don't see any good coming out of the actions of the globalizing forces. What we are seeing is the breaking down of the nation into smaller chunks (balkanization) and at the same time, the organization of those small chunks into regions. With each little chunk having its own head which has little power within itself but reporting to the regional head, you will see the power of the nation evaporate and the forces of globalization take preeminence. This is the writing on the wall. When nations go or even before the others, America goes. Anti-Americanism is palpable and there are those anxiously waiting for and planning for America's demise. It's nice to see your optimism. I wish I could go along with it.

The Liberal Lie The Conservative Truth said...

Otto, I understand to a certain extent why we must Globalize and we have economically and with our foreign policy initiatives.

But like tapline mention this is also looked on in the US a releasing some of our soverignty.

It also has a similar take to bowing to the UN though it may not necessarily be the UN as such that this Globalization is under.

Most Americans as an example despise the idea of a North American Union for the very reason that I stated above.

We can still lead the world in most every aspect without releasing our soverignty.

Additionally complete Globalization by the US will require that we conform with other nations which may very well cause two problems:

1. Weakening our strong and Constitutional principle as a free Republic as we in order to compromise take on features of those countries that we partner with in Globalization.

2. As the worlds only Super Power, many nations will expect us to back down from that status which will leave us and those we protect vulnerable to some despot and/or terrorism.

We can certainly lead but not conform.

heidianne jackson said...

otto, i don't believe that there will be a great boon for those who globalize - yes the world's population is increasing, but by and large it is increasing with a people who don't want to participate in western lifestyles and marketplaces. read that to mean muslims. currently only muslims are increasing their population and native populations in ever country are either stagnant or declining.

with that being the case, the more we globalize, the more we are turning over to those who do not honor, respect or even WANT our way of life. we are already seeing this in real live action in the eu - non-muslim populations live in fear of the muslims amongst them so that they don't offend them.

i do believe america needs to have more free trade world-wide, but this whole globalization crap? um did i mention it's crap?

MK said...

Heidianne has a point, the ones set to grow and hence dictate what will happen in the coming decades don't necessarily like us in the west and don't think like us.

"When America is percieved as having lost its way, it makes for a more uncertain world."

I often say when imploring Americans never to give up their guns that if they ever do, we're all screwed.

Too many western nations are dependent on the US for their security. Whilst America is an ally, it's not a good thing, it encourages dependence and also resentment.

American Interests.blog said...

Woman H Thyself: Thanks Angel

American Interests.blog said...

There is a great deal of truth in your commentary.

That it compromises sovereignty and nation status, the analogies with the EU, (Tap), of being akin to balkanization, and evaporation of national entities, (Aurora). “Weakening our strong and Constitutional principle as a free Republic,” and surrendering of national status thus weakening the nation, (Lib Lie). “The more we globalize, the more we are turning over to those who do not honor, respect or even WANT our way of life,” (Heidianne), and finally (MK), who also suggests that,” the ones set to grow and hence dictate what will happen in the coming decades don't necessarily like us in the west and don't think like us.”

I will not quibble with any of this, they are, all of them, sound pointers.

Globalization is, for better or worse, a happening phenomenon that is set to expand, therefore, there is little, or nothing we can do about it. In light of this, and hence, this forms the core of my argument, I call on U.S. policymakers to expand the currently narrowly focused grand plan to something far broader like, securing the future in accordance with America’s Interests by taking control of the process through a “recalibration of interaction through positive leadership”.

Allow me to offer a short excerpt of a forthcoming post. Globalization has caused some to question whether the principle drivers of international affairs are no longer nation states but rather, some sort of evolving worldly system. The problem here is that it assumes a global system that somehow manages itself, the reality is, that the enforcement of political and economic needs must be underpinned by rules in order to resolve differences and conflicts; only powerful nation states have the resources and authorities to mange/enforce agreements, to deal with international threats and inter-state rivalries.

I leave you with a thought, is it realistic to believe that consensus between nations can maintain order through a system in which states voluntarily abide by rules? States cooperate because there is an in-balance of power between them not the reverse. The U.S is well placed to continue being the dominant state, the military power, the economic powerhouse, the exemplary state that, through its ideology and territorial immunity sustains international order. I call on America to remain that nation, that body if you will, that remains the force behind Globalization, the force that guarantees the rest of us that others will not pursue interests related to prosperity and security that threatens other states and current international order.

Like Ken Taylor says, “We (America) can still lead the world in most every aspect without releasing our sovereignty…. lead but not conform.”