Washingtonpost.

Newsweek Interactive, LLC

In Praise of Cultural Imperialism?

Author(s): David Rothkopf
Source: Foreign Policy, No. 107 (Summer, 1997), pp. 38-53
Published by: Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1149331
Accessed: 03/10/2010 00:31

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=wpni.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Foreign Policy.

http://www.jstor.org
In Praise of
Cultural
T t t C)
lmperlallsm
o . .

byDavidRothkopf

_ ze gatesol t ze worc aregroamng

fi -

W * Ishut. Frommarblebalconiesand
| over the airwaves:demagogues
| decrynewrisksto ancientcultures
| andtraditionalvalues.Satellites:
the
Intemet,andjumbojetscarry thecontagion. Tomanypeople,"foreign"
hasbecomea synonym for"danger."
Of course,now is not the firsttimein historythatchantsand
anthems of nationalismhavebeenheard.Butthe tideof nationalism
sweeping theworldtodayisunique. Forit comesin reaction to a coun-
tervailingglobalaltemative that forthefirsttimeinhistory isclear-
lysomething morethanthecrackpot dream ofvisionaries.
Itisalsothe
firsttimeinhistory thatvirtually everyindividual
ateverylevelofsoci-
etycansensethe impactof intemational changes.Theycanseeand
hearit in theirmedia,tasteit in theirfood,andsenseit in theproducts
thattheybuy.Evenmorevisceralandthreatening to thosewhofear
thesechangesis thegrowthof a globallaborpoolthatduring thenext
decadewillabsorb nearly2 billionworkers fromemerging markets,a

D A V I D R O T H K O P F is managingdirector
of Kissinger
Associates
andan adjunct pro-
fessorofintemationalaffairs
atColumbia University.Heservedasa seniorofficial
intheU.S.
Department ofCommerce duringthefirsttermof theClintonadministration.

38 Fo REIG N P O L IC Y
 Rothkopf

poolthatcurrently includes closeto 1 billionunemployed andunder-

employed workers in thosemarkets alone.Thesepeoplewillbeworking
fora fractionof whattheircounterparts in developed nationseamand
willbeonlymarginally lessproductive.Youareeithersomeone whois
threatened bythischangeorsomeone whowillprofitfromit, butit is
almostimpossible to conceive of a significantgroupthatwillremain
untouched byit.
Globalization haseconomic rootsandpolitical consequences, butit
alsohasbrought intofocusthepowerofculturein thisglobalenviron-
ment thepowerto bindandto dividein a timewhenthe tensions
betweenintegration andseparation tugateveryissuethatisrelevant to

internationalrelations.
Theimpactofglobalization on culture andtheimpactofculture on
globalizationmeritdiscussion. The homogenizing influences of global-
izationthataremostoftencondemned bythenewnationalists andby
culturalromanticists areactuallypositive;globalization promotes inte-
grationand the removal not onlyof culturalbarriersbut of many of the
negative dimensions ofculture.Globalization isa vitalsteptoward both
a morestableworldandbetterlivesforthepeoplein it.
Furthermore, theseissueshaveserious implicationsforAmerican for-
eignpolicy.FortheUnited States,a centralobjective ofan Information
Ageforeign policymustbeto winthebattleoftheworld's information
flows,dominating theairwaves asGreatBritain onceruledtheseas.

CULTURE AND CONFLICT

Culture is notstatic;it growsoutof a systematicallyencouraged rever-
enceforselected customs and habits.Indeed, Third
Webster's New Inter-
rlaiiorlal definescultureas the "totalpattemof
Diciiorlary human
behavior andits products embodiedinspeech,action,andartifacts and
dependent upon man's capacityforleaming and transmittingknowl-
edgeto succeeding generations." Language, politicalandlegal
religion,
systems, andsocialcustoms arethelegacies ofvictorsandmarketers and
reflectthejudgment ofthemarketplace ofideasthroughout popular his-
tory.Theymightalsorightlybe seenaslivingartifacts, bitsandpieces
carried forward through theyearson currents of popular
indoctrination,
acceptance, andunthinking adherence to oldways. Culture usedby
is
theorganizers ofsociety politicians, theologians,academics, andfam-
ilies to imposeandensureorder, therudiments ofwhichchangeover

S U MM ER 1 9 9 7 39
Powerof Culture

timeasneeddictates. It is lessoftenacknowledged asthemeansofjus-

tifyinginhumanity andwarfare. Nonetheless, evena casualexamina-
tionofthehistory ofconflictexplains wellwhySamuel Huntington, in
hisTheClashofCivilizations, expectsconflictalongculturalfaultlines,
whichisprecisely whereconflictsooftenerupts. Evenworseisthatcul-
turaldifferencesareoftensanctified bytheirlinksto themystical roots
ofculture, betheyspiritual orhistorical.
Consequently,a threatto one's
culturebecomes a threatto one'sGodorone'sancestors and,therefore,
to one'scoreidentity. Thisinflammatory formula hasbeenusedto jus-
tify many ofhumanity's worstacts.
Culturalconflicts canbeplacedintothreebroadcategories: religious
warfare,ethnicconflict,andconflictbetween"cultural cousins," which
amounts to historical animosity between culturesthatmaybesimilar in
somerespects butstill havesignificant differences
thathavebeenused
to justify
conflictoverissuesof
The decline of proximity,
demands such greed.
orsimpleas resource
cultural distinctions Religion-based
conflicts
occur
betweenChristians
andMuslims,
may be a measure of Christiansand Jews,Muslims
] o andJews,HindusandMuslims,
tne progress ol SufisandSunis,Protestants
and
civllization, a tangible Cath°liCs
conflicts
spring andsoforth.Cultural
that
fromeinic
sign of enhanced (andinsomecasesreligious) dif-
ferencesincludethosebetween
communicationsand ChineseandVietnamese, Chi-
. neseandJapanese, Chineseand
UlUlderStandlNg. Malays,Normansand Saxons,
SlavsandTurks, Armenians and
Azerbaijanis, Armenians andTurks, TurksandGreeks,Russians and
Chechens, SerbsandBosnians, HutusandTutsis,blacksandAfrikan-
ers,blacksandwhites,andPersians andArabs.Conflicts between"cul-
turalcousins" overresources orterritory
haveoccurred betweenBritain
andFrance, FranceandGer-lllany, LibyaandEgypt, andmanyothers.
Anothercategory thatmightbe included in ourtaxonomy is quasi-
cultural conflict.Thisconflictisprimarilyideological
andisnotdeeply
enoughrootedin tradition to fitwithinstandarddefinitions
ofculture,
yetit still exhibitsmostifnotallof thecharacteristics ofothercultural
40 FO R E I G N P O LIC Y
 Rothkopf

clashes.The best examplehere is the ColdWaritself,a conflict

betweenpoliticalculturesthat wasportrayed by its combatants in
broader culturalterms:"godless communists" versus"corrupt capital-
ists."Duringthisconflict,differencesregardingtheroleof theindivid-
ualwithinthe stateandoverthe distribution of incomeproduced a
"clashofcivilizations"
thathada relatively recentorigin.
Finally,
asa reminder of the toll thatsuchconflictstake,oneneed
onlylookatthe20thcentury's genocides. Ineachone,leaders usedcul-
turetO fuelthepassionsof theirarmies andotherminionsandtO jUSti-
fy theiractionsamongtheirpeople.OnemillionArmenians; tensof
millionsofRussians;10millionJews,Gypsies, andhomosexuals; 3 mil-
lionCambodians; andhundreds of thousandsof Bosnians} Rwandans,
andTlmorese allwerethevictimsof"culture"whether it wasethnic,
religious,
ideological,
tribal,or nationalisticin its origins.Tobe sure,
theyfellvictimto otheragendas aswell.Buttheprovocative elements
ofculturewereto theseaccompanying agendas asJoseph Goebbels was
toAdolfHitler-anenabler andperhaps themostinsidious accomplice.
Historianscan,ofcourse,findexamples fromacross theagesof"superiz
or"cultures eradicating
"inferior" opponentsin theAmerican West,
amongthenativetribesof theAmericas andAfrica,duringtheInqui-
sition,andduring theexpansion ofvirtuallyeveryempire.

SATELLITES AS CULTURAL DEATH STARS

Criticsof globalizationarguethattheprocesswillleadto a stripping
awayof identityanda blandly uniform, Orwellian world.On a planet
of 6 billionpeople,thisis,of course,animpossibility.
Moreimportant-
ly,thedeclineof cultural distinctionsmaybea measure of theprogress
ofcivilization,
a tangiblesignofenhanced communications andunder-
standing. Successfill
multicultural societies,
betheynations, federations,
or otherconglomerations of closelyinterrelatedstates,discernthose
aspectsof culturethatdo not threatenunion,stability, or prosperity
(suchasfood,holidays, rituals,andmusic)andallowthemto flourish.
Buttheycounteract oreradicate themoresubversive elements of cul-
ture(exclusionary aspectsofreligion,language,andpoliticaVideological
beliefs).Historyshowsthatbridging cultural
gapssuccessfullyandserv-
ingasa hometo diverse peoplesrequires certainsocialstructures,
laws,
andinstitutions thattranscend culture.Furthermore,the historyof a
numberof ongoingexperiments in multiculturalism,
suchas in the

S U M M ER 1 9 9 7 41
Powerof Culture

European Union,India,SouthAfrica,andtheUnitedStates,suggests
thatworkable, ifnotperfected, integrative modelsexist.Eachisbuilton
theideathattolerance iscrucial to socialwell-being, andeachattimes
hasbeenthreatened bybothintolerance anda heightened emphasis on
culturaldistinctions. The greaterpublicgoodwarrants eliminating
thosecultural characteristics thatpromote conflictorprevent harmony,
evenasless-divisive, morepersonally observed cultural distinctions
are
celebratedandpreserved.
Therealization ofsuchintegrative modelsona globalscaleisimpos-
siblein the nearterm.It willtakecenturies. Norcanit be achieved
purelythrough rationaldecisions geared toward implementing carehslly
consideredpoliciesandprograms. Rather, current trendsthatfallunder
the broaddefinitional umbrella of"globalization" areaccelerating a
processthathastakenplacethroughout historyasdiscrete groupshave
becomefamiliar withoneanother, allied,andcommingledultimately
becoming morealike.Inevitably, theUnitedStateshastakenthelead
in thistransformation; it is the"indispensable nation"in themanage-
mentofglobalaffairs andtheleading producer of information products
andservices in these,theearlyyearsof theInformation Age.
Thedrivers oftoday's rapidglobalization areimproving methods and
systemsof intemational transportation, devisingrevolutionary and
innovative information technologies andservices, anddominating the
intemational commerce in servicesand ideas.Theirimpactaffects
lifestyles,
religion, language, andeveryothercomponent ofculture.
Muchhasbeenwrittenabouttheroleof information technologies
andservices in thisprocess. Today,15majorU.S.telecommunications
companies, including giantslikeMotorola, LoralSpace& Communi-
cations,andTeledesic (ajointproject ofMicrosoft's BillGatesandcel-
lularpioneerCraigMcCaw),offercompeting plansthatwillencircle
theglobewitha constellation of satellites andwillenableanyoneany-
whereto communicate instantlywithanyoneelsewhere withoutan
established telecommunications infrastructure on the groundnear
eitherthesenderortherecipient. (Loralputsthecostof sucha callat
around $3 perminute.)
Technology isnotonlytransforming theworld; it iscreatingitsown
metaphors aswell.Satellites carrying televisionsignals nowenablepeo-
pleonopposite sidesoftheglobetobeexposed regularly toa widerange
of culturalstimuli.Russian viewersarehookedon Latinsoapoperas,
andMiddleEastemleaders havecitedCNNasa primesource foreven
42 FO R E I G N P O LIC Y
 Rothkopf

localnews.The Internetis an increasinglyglobalphenomenon with

activedevelopment underwayon everycontinent.
TheUnitedStatesdominates thisglobaltrafficin informationand
ideas.American music}American movies,American television,and
American softwarearesodominantsosoughtafterandsovisiblethat
theyarenowavailable literally
everywhereon the Earth.Theyinflu-
encethetastes,lives,andaspirationsofvirtually
everynation.Insome}
theyareviewedascorrupting.
EXPORTINGAMERICANIDEAS

American Share of World Market AmericanShareof WorldMarket

for Prepackaged Software (1994) forPrerecordedMusic

*Figille is an estimate based oll ttoltzmeof

1T.S.-ounnedlepettoilte licensedfot manilfactitle
abl oad combined u?ithdomestic sales in 1996.

Anlerican Share of World Book Market (1995)

Sources: Business
Software
Alliance,Recording
Industry
Association
of America,Euromonitor
Mc.

FranceandCanadahavebothpassedlawsto prohibit the satellite

disseminationof foreign--meaningAmerican-content acrosstheir
bordersandintothehomesof theircitizens. Notsurprisingly}
in many
othercountries--fundamentalistIran communist China,and the
closelymanagedsocietyof Singapore-central governmentshave
aggressively
soughtto restrict
thesoftwareandprogrammingthatreach
theircitizensTheirexplicitobjectiveis to keepout Americanand
S U M M ER 1 997 43
Powerof Culture

otheralienpolitical views,mores, and,asit iscalledinsomepartsofthe

MiddleEast,"newspollution." In thesecountries, thecontrolof new
mediathatgivepreviously closedorcontrolled societies virtuallyunlim-
itedaccessto theoutsideworldisa highpriority. Singapore hassought
to filteroutcertainthingsthatareavailable overtheIntemet essen-
tiallyprocessing all information to eliminate pomography. Chinahas
setupa "Central Leading Group" undertheStatePlanning Commis-
sionandthedirectsupervision of a vicepremier to establish a similar
systemthatwill excludemorethanjustwhatmightbe considered
obscene.
Thesegovemments arethe heirsof KingCanute,the infamous
monarch whosethisthroneatthesea'sedgeandcommanded thewaves
to gobackward. TheSovietUnionfellin partbecause a closedsociety
cannotcompetein the Information Age.Thesecountries willfareno
better.Theyneedlooknofurther thantheirownelitestoknowthis.In
China,whilesatellitedishesaretechnically againstthe law,approxi-
matelyonein fivecitizensof Beijinghasaccessto television program-
mingviaa dish,andalmosthalfofthepeopleofGuangzhou haveaccess
to satellite-deliveredprogramming. Singapore, theleadingentrepot of
Southeast Asia,isahubinaglobalnetwork ofbusiness centersinwhich
thelivesof theelitesarevirtually identical. Business leaders in Buenos
Aires,Frankfurt, HongKong,Johannesburg, Istanbul, LosAngeles,
MexicoCity,Moscow, NewDelhi,NewYork,Paris,Rome,Santiago,
Seoul,Singapore, TelAviv,andTokyoall readthe samenewspapers,
wearthesamesuits,drivethesamecars,eatthesamefood,flythesame
airlines,stayinthesamehotels,andlistentothesamemusic.Whilethe
peopleof theircountries remaindividedbyculture, theyhaverealized
thatto competein the globalmarketplace theymustconform to the
culture of thatmarketplace.
The globalmarketplace is beinginstitutionalized through the cre-
ationof a seriesof multilateralentitiesthatestablish commonrulesfor
intemational commerce. Ifcapitalistoflowfreely, disclosure rulesmust
bethesame,settlement procedures consistent, andredress transparent.
Ifgoodsarealsotomoveunimpeded, tarifflawsmustbeconsistent, cus-
tomsstandards harmonized, andproduct safetyandlabeling standards
brought intoline.Andifpeopleareto moveeasilyfromdealtodeal,air
transport agreements needtobeestablished, immigration controls stan-
dardized, andcommercial lawsharmonized. In manyways,business is
theprimary enginedrivingglobalization, butit wouldbe a mistake to
44 FO R EIG N P O LIC Y
 Rothkopf

conclude thattheimplications ofglobalizationwillbelimitedprimari-

ly to thecommercial arena.
Inpolitics,forexample, asintemational organizations ariseto coor-
dinatepolicyamongmanynationson globalissuessuchas trade,the
environment, health,development, andcrisismanagement, a commu-
nityof intemational bureaucratsisemerging. Theseplayers areascom-
fortableoperating intheintemational environment astheywouldbeat
home,andtheorganizations thattheyrepresent ineffectestablish glob-
alstandards andexpectations-facilitating theprogress ofglobalization.
Thecommunity of nationsincreasinglyacceptsthatsuchsuprana-
tionalentitiesaredemanded bytheexigencies of thetimes;withthat
acceptance also comesa recognition that the principal symbolof
nationalidentinamely sovereignty-must be partially cededto
thoseentities.TheUnitedStatesin particular seemsto haveproblems
withthistrend.Forexample, theUnitedStateswasinvolvedin creat-
ingtheWorldTrade Organization andnowundermines itseffectiveness
by arbitrarily
withdrawing fromits effortsto bluntthe effectsof the
Helms-Burton act.Still,therecognition thatsometimes thereareinter-
estsgreaterthannational interests
isa crucial
steponthepathtoa more
peaceful,prosperous world.

TOWARD A GLOBAL CULTURE

Itisin thegeneralinterestoftheUnitedStatesto encourage thedevel-
opmentof a worldin whichthe faultlinesseparating nationsare
bridged by sharedinterests.And it is in the economicandpolitical
interestsof the UnitedStatesto ensurethatif the worldis moving
toward a commonlanguage, it be English;
thatif theworldis moving
towardcommontelecommunications, safety,and qualitystandards,
theybe American; thatif theworldis becoming linkedbytelevision,
radio,andmusic,theprogramming beAmerican; andthatif common
valuesarebeingdeveloped, theybe valueswithwhichAmericans are
comfortable.
Thesearenot simplyidleaspirations. Englishis linkingthe world.
American information
technologies andservicesareatthecuttingedge
of thosethatareenabling globalization.Accessto thelargest economy
intheworld-America's-is theprimary calTotleadingothernationsto
opentheirmarkets.
Indeed,justastheUnitedStatesis theworld's soleremaining mili-

S U M M ER 1 997 45
PoweroJCulture

Unveilinga New GlobalCulture

McL9onald S Corporatlon

tarysuperpower, soisit theworld'sonlyinformation

superpower. While
Japanhasbecomequitecompetitive inthemanufacture ofcomponents
integral
to information systems,ithashada negligible
impactasa man-
ufacturerof softwareorasa forcebehindthetechnological revolution.
Europe hasfailedonbothfronts. Consequently,
theUnitedStatesholds
a positionofadvantage atthemomentandfortheforeseeable future.
SomefindtheideathatAmericans wouldsystematicallyseektopro-
motetheircultureto be unattractive. Theyareconcemedthat it
impliesa senseof superiority on Americans'partor thatit makesan
uncomfortable valuejudgment. Buttherealpolitik
of the Information
Ageisthatsettingtechnological standards,
defining
software standards,
producing the mostpopular informationproducts,
andleadingin the
related
development oftheglobaltradeinservices
areasessential tothe
well-beingofanywould-be leaderasonceweretheresources neededto

46 FO R E I G N P O LIC Y
 Rothkopf

support empireorincustry.
Theeconomic stakesareimmense considering theenormous invest-
mentsthatwillbemadeoverthenext10yearsin theworld's informa-
tion infrastructure. The U.S. governmentestimates that
telecommunications investment in LatinAmericaaloneduringthis
periodwilltop$150billion.Chinawillspenda similar amount, aswill
themember statesof theAssoci-
ation of South East Asian
Nations.In fact,the marketfor Americans should
te ecommunlcatlons servlces 1S
expected to top$1trillionbythe not deny the fact
turnof thecentury.
Duringthedecadeahead,not that of al the
only will enormoussums be nations in the
directedtowardthe establish-
mentof the globalnetworkof world! theirs is the
networksthat the Clinton
administration has dubbedthe most just and the
"GlobalInformation Infrastruc-
ture," butthosesumswillpayfor best model for the
thefoundations of a systemthat future.
will dictatedecadesof future
choicesaboutupgrades, systems
standards, software purchases, and services.At the same time, new
national andinternational lawswillbewritten, andtheywilldetermine
howsmoothlyinformation productsandservicesmayflowfromone
marketto another. Willstepsbe takento ensurethatInternetcom-
merceremainstrulyfree?Whatdecisionswill be madeaboutthe
encryption ofdatathatwillimpact notonlythesecurity ofinformation
markets butthefreeflowof ideasandtherightsof individuals in the
Information Age?Willgovernments allowthedemocratizing promise of
theIntemettoenablevirtually anyonewitha computer tocontactany-
oneelse?
The establishment of the GlobalInformation Infrastructure is not
justan enormous commercial opportunity fortheworld's information
leader. Thedevelopment of therulesgoverning thatinfrastructure will
shapethenature ofglobalpoliticsdecisively, eitherenhancing orunder-
miningfreedoms, thereby eitherspeeding orslowingthepaceof inte-
gration,understanding, and toleranceworldwide. The natureof
S U MMER 19 9 7 47
Powerof Culture

individualandnationalrelations willbe transformed. Thosewiresand

constellationsofsatellites
andinvisible beamsofelectronic signalscriss-
crossingtheglobewillliterally formthefabricoffuturecivilization.
Consequently, it couldnot be morestrategically crucialthatthe
UnitedStatesdowhatever is in itspowerto shapethedevelopment of
thatinfrastructure,therulesgoveming it, andtheinformation travers-
ingit. Moreover, evenif muchof thisprocess of developing whatwe
mightcallthe"infosphere" is leftto themarketplace (asit shouldbe),
govemments will controlcrucialelementsof it. Govemments will
award manyofthebiggestinfrastructure development contracts offered
in thenextdecade: Somewillassisttheirnational companies in trying
to winthosecontracts, andstateofficials willmeetto decidethetrade
rulesthatwillgoverninternational trafficin theworld's telecommuni-
cationsmarkets, the globalregulatory environment, encryption stan-
dards,privacystandards, intellectual property protections,andbasic
equipment standards. Govemments willdetermine whethertheseare
openorclosedmarkets andwhatportion ofdevelopment dollarswillbe
targetedat bringing the benefitsof thesetechnologies to the poorto
help counteract information inequities. Alreadysomegovernment
intercessionsintothismarketplace havefailed.Notably, Japan'sefforts
to shapethedevelopment of high-definition televisionstandards sent
thatnationdownananalogpathinwhattumedouttobea digitalrace.
Yettherearemanyplaceswherethereis animportant roleforgovem-
mentsandwheretheUnitedStatesshouldhavea carefully considered
overarching policyandanaggressive stanceto match.
EXPORTING THE AMERICAN MODEL
Manyobservers contendthatit is distasteful
to usethe opportunities
createdbytheglobalinformation revolutiontopromote Americancul-
tureoverothers,butthatkindof relativism is as dangerous
as it is
wrong.American cultureis fundamentallydifferent fromindigenous
culturesin so manyotherlocales.American cultureis an amalgam of
influences andapproaches fromaround theworld.It is melded-con-
sciouslyin manycases intoa socialmediumthatallowsindividual
freedoms andcultures to thrive.Recognizing this,Americansshould
not shyawayfromdoingthatwhichis so clearlyin theireconomic,
political,andsecurity
interests-andso clearlyin the interests
of the
worldatlarge.TheUnitedStatesshouldnothesitatetopromote itsval-
ues.Inaneffortto bepoliteorpolitic,Americans shouldnotdenythe
48 Fo R E I G N P O LIC Y
 Rothkopf

factthatofallthenationsin thehistory oftheworld,theirsisthemost

just,the mosttolerant,the mostwillingto constantly reassessand
improveitself,andthe bestmodelforthe future.At the sametime,
Americans shouldnotfallunderthespellof thoselikeSingapore's Lee
KuanYewandMalaysia's Mahathir bin-Mohamad, who arguethat
thereis"anAsianway," onethatnon-Asians shouldnotjudgeandthat
shouldbeallowed to dictatethecourseofeventsforallthoseoperating
in thatcornerof theworld.Thisargument amounts to self-interested
political rhetoric. Goodandevil,betterandworsecoexistinthisworld.
Thereareabsolutes, andtherearepolitical, economic, andmoralcosts
associated withfailingto recognize thisfact.
Repression is not defensible whetherthe tradition fromwhichit
springsis Confician,Judeo-Christian, or Zoroastrian. The repressed
individual stillsuffers, asdoessociety,andthereareconsequences for
theglobalcommunity. Realcostsaccrueintermsofconstrained human
creativity, delayedmarketdevelopment, the diversionof assetsto
enforce repression, thefailure ofrepressivesocietiesto adaptwellto the
rapidly changingglobalenvironment, andthe dislocations, struggles,
and instability thatresultfromtheseandotherfactors.Americans
shouldpromote theirvisionforthe world,becausefailingto do so or
takinga "liveandlet live"stanceis cedingthe processto the not-
always-beneficial actionsof others.Usingthetoolsof theInformation
Age to do so is perhapsthe mostpeacefulandpowerful meansof
advancing American interests.
IfAmericans nowlivein a worldin whichideascanbe effectively
exported andmediadelivery systems arepowerful, theymustrecognize
thatthenatureofthoseideasandthecontrolof thosesystems aremat-
terswithwhichtheyshouldbedeeplyconcerned. Isit a threatto U.S.
interests, to regional peace,to American markets, andto the United
States's abilitytO leadifforeign leadersadoptmodelsthatpromote sep-
aratism andthecultural faultlinesthatthreaten stability? Itcertainlyis.
Relativism is a veilbehindwhichthosewhoshunscrutiny canhide.
WhetherAmericans acceptall the arguments of Huntington or not,
theymustrecognize thatthegreater thecultural valuegapsintheworld,
themorelikelyit isthatconflictwillensue.Thecritical prerequisitefor
gainingthe optimum benefitsof globalintegration is to understand
whichculturalattributes can andshouldbe tolerated-and,indeed,
promoted-and whicharethefissures thatwillbecomefaultlines.
It is alsocrucialthatthe UnitedStatesrecognize its limitations.
S U MMER 1 9 9 7 49
Powerof Culture

Americans canhavemoreinfluence thanothers, buttheycannotassure

everyoutcome. Rather, theconcerted efforttO shapethedevelopment
of theGlobalInformation Infrastructure
andtheideasthatflowwithin
it shouldbe seenmerelyasa singlecomponent of a well-rounded for-
eignandsecurity policy.(Andsinceit is not likelyto be an initiative
thatiswidelylikedoradmired orenhanced through explicitpromotion,
it isnotanapproach thatshouldbepartofAmerican publicdiplomacy
efforts.)
Ofcourse,implementing suchanapproach isnotgoingtobeeasyin
anAmerica thatiswracked bythereaction to andthebacklash against
globalization.Today,the extremeleftandrightwingsof bothmajor
politicalpartiesareunitedin a newisolationist alliance. Thisalliance
hasputthebrakes on 60 yearsof expanding freetrade,hasfocused on
thethreats rather thanthepromise posedbysuchcriticalnewrelation-
shipsas thosewithChinaandotherkeyemerging markets, andhas
seizedon everyavailable opportunityto disengage fromtheworldorto
undermine U.S.abilities toengageorleadeffectively. Itwilltakeacom-
mittedeXortbythepresident andcooperation fromleaders on Capitol
Hillto overcome thepoliticaloppositionof theeconomic nationalists
andneoisolationists. It willnothappenif thosein leadership positions
aimsimplyto takethepathofleastpolitical resistance orto reston the
accomplishments of the recentpast.In a timeof partisan bickering,
whentheemphasis of topofficials
hasshiftedfromgoverning to poli-
ticking,thereis a riskthatAmerica willfailto riseto thesechallenges.
Whilethe Clintonadministration hasbrokenimportant groundin
developing aGlobalInformation Infrastructure initiativeandindealing
withthefuture oftheIntemet,encryption issues, andintellectual prop-
ertyconcerns, theseefforts areunderfunded, sometimes managed tosuit
politicalratherthanstrategic objectives,
shortsighted (particularly
the
stepsconceming encryption, in whichrapidchangesandthedemands
of themarketplace arebeingoverlooked), andpoorlycoordinated. At
thesametime,someofAmerica's mostpowerfiltoolsofengagement-
whichcomein theformofnewtradeinitiatives-seemingly havebeen
shelved.Thisproblem is mostclearlymanifested in thefactthatfast-
tracknegotiating-authority approvalhasnot yetbeengranted andin
the realpossibility thatCongress will refuseto grantsuchapproval
beforethetumof thecentury.
TheClintonadministration anditssuccessors mustcarefully consid-
erthelongHterm implications ofglobalization, suchastheimpactofthe
50 FO R E I G N P O LIC Y
 Rothkopf

riseofnewmarkets on America's economic influence andhowAmeri-

ca canmaintain its leadership
role.Aspectsof American culturewill
playa criticalroleinhelpingto ensurethecontinuation ofthatleader-
ship.American cultural diversity
givestheUnitedStatesresources and
potential linkswithvirtuallyeverymarket andeverymajor powerinthe
world.America's emphasis on the individual ensuresthatAmerican
innovation willcontinueto outstrip thatof othernations.Working in
itsfavoris thefactthatthe"PaxAmericana" is a phenomenon of the
earlyyearsofglobalization andthattheU.S.ascendancy to undisputed
leadership cameatthesametimeastheestablishment of intemational
institutionssuchastheUnitedNations, theWorldBank,andtheInter-
national Monetary Fund;thus,forallthechallenges ofadjustment, the
UnitedStateshasmoreleadership experience thananyothernationin
thisnewglobalenvironment. Also,thoughsomemaydecryAmericans'
emphasis on "newness" andsuggest thatit is a resultof theirlackof an
extensive history,
it alsorepresents
a healthylackofcultural "baggage":
It is thisemphasis on newnessthatputstheUnitedStatesin thebest
positionto dealwitha worldinwhichtherapidity ofchangeisperhaps
thegreatest strategicchallenge
ofall.

IDENTITY WITHOUT CULTURE

Theopportunity liesbeforeusasAmericans. TheUnitedStatesis in a
positionnotonlyto leadin the21stcentury asthedominant powerof
the Information Agebutto do so bybreaking downthe barriers that
dividenations-andgroups withinnations andbybuilding tiesthat
createanevergreater reservoir ofsharedinterests
amonganeverlarger
community ofpeoples. Thosewholookat thepost{Cold Wareraand
seethe "clashof civilizations" seeonlyonepossibility.
Theyoverlook
the greatstridesin integration thathaveunitedthe world's billions.
Theydiscount thefactors thathaveledto globalconsolidation andthe
realitythatthosefactors growinpowerwitheachnewdayoftheglobH
al era integration is a trendthatbuildsuponitself.Theyarguethat
America shouldprepare fortheconflictsthatmaycomein thisinterim
periodwithoutarguing thatit shouldaccelerate
thearrival
ofa newera
witheverymeansat itsdisposal.
Certainly,
it isnaiveto expectbroadsuccessin avoiding fitureconH
flictsamongcultures. Butwenowhavetoolsatourdisposal todiminish
thedisparitiesthatwillfuelsomeof thoseconflicts. Whileweshould

S U MM ER 1 9 9 7 51
Powerof Culture

prepare forconflict,weshouldalsoremember thatit isnotmereideal-

ismthatdemands thatweworkforintegration andin support of a uni-
fying global cultureensuringindividualrightsand enhancing
international stability:
Itisalsotheultimate realpolitik,theultimate act
of healthyself-interest.
Allowingourselves to besweptupin thebacklash against
globaliza-
tionwouldundermine America's abilityto advanceits self-interests.
Americans mustrecognize thatthoseinterests andtheissuespertaining
to themreachacross thedisciplines ofeconomics, politics,science,and
culture.An interdisciplinary approach to international policymaking is
thusrequired. Wemustalsoiilllyunderstand thenewtoolsat ourdis-
posal.Wemustunderstand theprofound importance andnatureof the
emerginginfospherej and its potentialas a giantorganicculture
processor,democratic empowerer, universal connector, andultimate
communicator. Moreover, it isnotenoughto createandimplement the
rightpoliciesusingthenewtoolsatourdisposal. Policymakers mustbet-
tercommunicate thepromise of thisnewworldandmakeclearAmer-
ica'sstakein thatpromise andtheroleAmericans mustplayto achieve
success.TheUnitedStatesdoesnotfacea simplechoicebetweeninte-
grationorseparation, engagement orwithdrawal. Rather, thechoiceis
betweenleadinga morepeaceiill worldorbeingheldhostageto events
in a morevolatileandviolentone.

Want to Know More ?

TheClashofCivitizations andtheRernalcing oftheWorldOrder} bySamuelHunt
ington(NesvYorkv Simon& Schuster} 1996),is tht hot bookof dle mc)ment
<nthe t(:)piC C¢ culturetmditsiUlpclCt on internationcl reL1tions. Itsupports tlle
thesisthatca;llture is the greatdivi(:ler
am:)-ng
[?eoplesb-v.ltfailstO acknrwledgye
the culttlralc<lasolidations thathavebroughtthe wc)rld into the fewbigblock.s

described in the t?ook.It alsofailsto pc.stulate

a positiveagendaforthe UnitS
ed Statesin this new wrld} oxrerl(:)c)ks the powerfulteXchn-kagical fcrcesthat
rnightworktc)helphridgeculturcll disrides,
cmdsucc.lmbs to tlle n(:)tic)n tllXclt we

live i11a postoideol(lgicl era,whichis clbstlrdgiventllatthe ideolcgyical fclulto

line isstlecf the past centur.r howto jtlstlyclistribute income-is morepress-
inCt,
ark challengingtodaythanesZer before.Anotherrecentweark of note on
the questi:)n of culture'S impacton the ev(:luti:n(:)fthe g-lob<ll community is

BenjaminBclrber's JihadversusMcWorld (New Y(:rk: TimesB:caks,1995),in

52 FO R E I G N P O LIC Y
 Rothkopf

wlwicllhe <rguesrlzatworklcc!nflictincreXasingly will center on tensions

hetweenlocXll values<ndglohalizing forces.Fortheoriesof howculturalfc)vm-
dationsmayaffecta society'< politicalandeconomicdevelopment, see Trust:
TheSocialVirtues andtheCreaiiorl ofProsperiry (NewYork:FreePress,1995)in
whichFrancisFukuyama tiesa society's<-lbility
to createcomplexorganiations
to the levelof trustfc)undin individual
sucll (ISInUltin<itiC)nalC(:)@Orsltit:)nS rela-
tionshipswithinthe culture.Fin<lly, SeymourMartinLipset's American Excep-
iionalism (NewYork:W.W.Norton,1996)dealswiththerelationship hetween
nationalandctllt-ural identityin the Unit:edStates.Justasenlightening, howS
ever,wouldbe to investin a subscription to WizedInagazine or to dexZotean
hc)ur(Iweek to visitingintenzation<ll Wehsites using any (:)fthe awkw<rd,
clut:nsy, andfnlstrating networknavigationsoftwarepackageson the market.
Whatevertheirdefects,tlleycannothelpbutamafie eventhe cynical.Youcan
findlinks to some examplesof tlleseWebsiteson FOREIGN POLICYXShome
plge at www.foreignpolicy.com.

S U M M ER 1 9 9 7 53