Grand S Grand Strategy for an Era of Decline The American Foreign Policy Debate in 2011 Not new: many

cycles over the last decades - people suggesting that US is becoming less powerful - counterreaction The rise of the rest - no of countries cracked generating more wealth and society China, Brazil, etc.. Fiscal picture within the US is looking bleak: American government and resources : finances look bad in short term - worse in medium term - apocalyptic in long term. Deficits of + 1 trillion dollar a year - collective national debt running up to 100% ... There is a lot less money coming in than is projected to go out (or even stand still) - so what can the US still afford in terms of its spending ? Obama: projected first nominal defense cuts in a generation (depending on Congress) Reasons - some others are spending notably more (China: 100 billion dollars / year BUT RISING - US: 700 billion - 1 trillion a year) - investment in research and development -- the military advantage might be eroded very quickly if not enough is spent - what is needed to continue their massive lead? Present American lead so great that it is unlikely that others will pass them by in the near future Present trends cannot predict the future. Power is relational - not only in crude terms of resources - find ways to persuade others to do what they want them to do .. ETC. no one will be able to catch up => what is the near future ?? is the glass half-empty or half-full ?? How substantial is their lead - 20-25 years too far in the future to be concerned or not? Present trends = dangerous base for prediction? NO - it is our "imperfect best" to predict the future ... US institutions - structural power - norms will outlive this decline. => they do not have an 'outside life' => as China becomes increasingly stronger Conceptual point - two definitions of US Power. Kenneth Waltz tried to define power in terms of resources

Grand S

Defining power by what you can achieve in terms of objectives Extent of to which all of the actions affects others (more than they are affected themselves) 2012 Weight of the US in a way that it can affect others without being affected itself is SHRINKING. Obama within the context of American policies Barack Obama is NO liberal's dream in Foreign Policy. He didn't breach that much promises (false projections by other people) 'failing to do things' that he did NOT promise to do. He opposed the Iraq war originally - a 'dumb' war - not immoral/illegal/... but DUMB - drawn down America's involvement but has consistently stated and restated that he is NOT a pacifist (see Nobel Prize Peace acceptance speech where he talked about war to protect statehood, ironically) Increasing the troops in Afghanistan - but also made some commitments to try and set a timeline for drawing down. Relatively tentative in his management of the Arab Spring - described his approach as 'leading from behind' to the campaign in Libya Obama has been hanging back, trying to deal reactively with events, not putting the US in the middle of situations they can't handle. Game of RESTRAINT with Iran - to an extent he managed to win back a degree of international credibility Got more tough with Iran (through sanctions) but makes it clear that he thinks a military solution to the problem does not exist When it comes to China, he is trying to hold on to longstanding American behavior Retired the label 'war on terror' - but increased use of special forces, drone attacks - war has not decreased... The Republicans have attached themselves to attacking all of these policies from a hawkish viewpoint. except for Ron Paul = true libertarian

Gingrich, Romney, Santorum: competing with each other in terms of 'toughness' Obama accused them of being intent on starting a war without thinking it

Grand S through. Make them look irresponsible. Even Romney (business-friendly) with regard to China has accused Obama of weakness - promised getting though on China - too soft on Arab Spring - not doing enough in Syria ... John McCain: drumbanging for American commitment to support the uprising in Syria Obama doesn't believe in American exceptionalism - Republicans DO (is their argument) - always implictly envoked but now explicit in this campaign

TWO POINTS about this debate 1) A lot of this debate is a little bit detached from reality. A lot of Republican rhetoric is based on 'magical thinking' - the government of Iran, internal politics of M-East countries, more confident of China is NOT bending to America's will - because of its presidents lack of authority ? NO: because of America's gradual decline of influence and power .. Republicans: we only need an iron will to reinstall this.. MORE commitment to invasions in Afghanistan/Iraq MORE in Iran etc MORE military resources ... 2) There is a choice between declining politely - managing the decline or going out screaming, roaring and shouting, refusing to believe that this IS the trajectory for the nation .. Obama is under a great deal of pressure to avoid compromise .. America is not in a position to reach out and compromise with Iran atm for example completely impossible .. 3) The election might look like a closing-window opportunity for some countries (for example Israel - reelection for Obama) Advise: oversee the steady decline Misterr Obama BIGGG FOREIGN POLICY INTERVENTIONS - electorate is SICK about Afghanistan - 55% says it has not been worth the resources.