SPONSORED BY:

Wanted: A New Grand Strategy

 

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

Separate multiple addresses with commas

SPONSORED BY
 

In a world characterized by change, more and more countries—especially great powers like Russia and China and India—will begin to chart their own course. That in turn will produce greater instability. America cannot forever protect every sea lane, broker every deal and fight every terrorist group. Without some mechanisms to solve common problems, the world as we have come to know it, with an open economy and all the social and political benefits of this openness, will flounder and perhaps reverse.

Now, these gloomy forecasts are not inevitable. Worst-case scenarios are developed so that they can be prevented. And there are many good signs in the world today. The most significant rising power—China—does not seem to seek to overturn the established order (as have many newly rising powers in the past) but rather to succeed within it. Considerable cooperation takes place every day at the ground level, among a large number of countries, on issues from nuclear nonproliferation to trade policy.

Sometimes a crisis provides an opportunity. The Washington G20 meeting, for instance, was an interesting portent of a future "post-American" world. Every previous financial crisis had been handled by the IMF, the World Bank or the G7 (or G8). This time, the emerging nations were fully represented. At the same time, the meeting was held in Washington, and George W. Bush presided. The United States retains a unique role in the emerging world order. It remains the single global power. It has enormous convening, agenda-setting and leadership powers, although they must be properly managed and shared with all the world's major players, old and new, in order to be effective.

President-elect Obama has powers of his own, too. I will not exaggerate the importance of a single personality, but Obama has become a global symbol like none I can recall in my lifetime. Were he to go to Tehran, for example, he would probably draw a crowd of millions, far larger than any mullah could dream of. Were his administration to demonstrate in its day-to-day conduct a genuine understanding of other countries' perspectives and an empathy for the aspirations of people around the world, it could change America's reputation in lasting ways.

This is a rare moment in history. A more responsive America, better attuned to the rest of the world, could help create a new set of ideas and institutions—an architecture of peace for the 21st century that would bring stability, prosperity and dignity to the lives of billions of people. Ten years from now, the world will have moved on; the rising powers will have become unwilling to accept an agenda conceived in Washington or London or Brussels. But at this time and for this man, there is a unique opportunity to use American power to reshape the world. This is his moment. He should seize it.

© 2008

Label

Newsweek Top Stories
Visions of a Decade
Visions of a Decade

From 2000-2009, one photo per month.

The Failure of Copenhagen
The Failure of Copenhagen

Why there could be a silver lining in a failed climate treaty.

Sex Scandals of the 2000s
Sex Scandals of the 2000s

From John Edwards to Mark Sanford, the decade's memorable affairs.

118 Days in Hell
118 Days in Hell

A NEWSWEEK journalist recounts his captivity in Iran.

Discuss

Sponsored by

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Inst @ 02/14/2009 10:45:03 PM

    I thought you were an Indian? Math failure; 1% economic growth correlates to a 1.01 multiplier, while 5% economic growth correlates to a 1.05 multiplier. In this case, 1.05/1.01 is much less than the 5 times you predicted, and the 1.10/1.03 ratio of growth that used to exist between the United States and China.

  • Posted By: Col B @ 12/29/2008 12:32:17 AM

    Coming from one who has studied terrorism both academically and professionally for the last 20 plus years, Bush is getting a "free pass" in his argument that the reason America has not been attacked is due to any action of his. Remember these facts:
    -9/11 was carried out by probably only 20 people...do we think that if Al Quaeda wanted to put in 100 more they couldn't have or even haven't?
    -UBL is very methodical...rest assured that if he had wanted to attack us again, he could have and would have
    --the worst thing, from his perspective, would be to stage another attack and bring the American people back together
    -AQ is spending us into oblivion
    -Bush created a breeding ground for new terrorists in Iraq

    UBL is WINNING the War on Terrorism against the US...with little expenditure, AQ (with the help from the current , inept Administration) has put the US on a war footing, nearly bandrupted us, watched our standing in the rest of the world deteriorate. UBL has stuck to his strategy and played us well. No...we have not been attacked again due to anything the Bush Admisnistration has done; we have not been reattacked because UBL chose not to.

  • Posted By: Trooper101st @ 12/24/2008 12:30:33 PM

    A NEO-CON wrote about this strategy. Why invade Iraq? The truths we seek will come out. Wat don't come out in the wash, comes out in the rinse. That smug, arrogant P.O.S Cheney should be the 1st one in shackles. REPUKES. Almost 5,000 KIA in Iraq. Bush & Co are MURDERERS. Thanx alot for sending us on a mission with no clear objective, you Retards. I voted for OBAMA and so did everyone else I know.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse

My Take

Customize the NEWSWEEK homepage
to feature your favorite columnists.

Customize Now