Early in the Cold War, the United States faced a similar crossroads. Some figures, such as President Dwight Eisenhower, took a tough line on the Soviet Union but counseled the need to be selective in confrontations, steering US foreign policy toward selectivity and what he called the “middle way”.
Others, such as the authors of NSC-68 (the influential 1950 National Security Council report in 1950), believed in an expansive, systemic approach to confronting the Soviet Union, a conviction that helped to entangle the United States in Vietnam. Washington is now at a similar juncture in a new great-power struggle, and it should choose a stance akin to Eisenhower’s.
We are not proposing a one-dimensional realpolitik. The United States must stand for freedom, republican government and human dignity. Standing for these values will draw others around the world to the US banner, help demonstrate the dangers of bowing to Beijing, and provide a motivating force to collective efforts. And we must recognise that Beijing itself thinks in at least substantially ideological terms, even if the competition is not fundamentally about ideology.
Yet foreign policy consists of a hierarchy of needs. Foreign policy — especially in a republic— should serve the interests of a country’s citizens. Although Americans may wish for China to become a freer and more just society, their government should not be responsible for making it so, especially given the costs and risks of pursuing an excessively ideological conflict with Beijing. The United States can and should certainly emphasise respect for human dignity and political rights as a way to distinguish itself from China. But policymakers must maintain a clear-eyed perspective and be selective, especially when the stakes are so high.
This is an excerpt from an article published in Foreign Affairs on September 4th, 2020.
ELBRIDGE COLBY is a Principal at the Marathon Initiative. He served as U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy and Force Development from 2017 to 2018.
ROBERT D. KAPLAN holds the Robert Strausz-Hupé Chair in Geopolitics at the Foreign Policy Research Institute. He is the author of The Good American: The Epic Life of Bob Gersony, the U.S. Government’s Greatest Humanitarian.
Comments
3 responses to “The Ideology Delusion: America’s Competition With China Is Not About Doctrine (Foreign Affairs Sep 4, 2020)”
The United States buoyed by its defeat of Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Imperialist Japan, but forgetting that The USSR actually defeated Germany in World War II , embarked on a campaign to make the rest of the world a mirror image of itself.This led to the Korean War, Vietnam , the Bay of Pigs fiasco and meddling in the leadership and governance of the countries of Central and South America , the Philippines. Several other silly adventures in the Caribbean , not to mention the Middle East, with terrible consequences for the freedoms and rights of the citizens of theses countries so affected. More recently we have Iraq and Afghanistan, both that look like Vietnam did , to end in tears and defeat. The U.S is currently imploding into internal strife, led by a wildly unpredictable President, who may actively resist the will of the people in a month or so The US of A is hardly a shining example of freedom,republican government or human dignity that other nations would wish to emulate. Meanwhile authoritarian China flexes its muscles with its “Belts and Roads Imitative” , enticing African, Pacific and some Asian countries into its fold with deals that are way too good to be true or good for those people so enticed . Not a good look at all for democracy.I agree with Malcolm’s quote from Mahatma Gandhi.He was spot on!
Yes, freedom fo Assange, republican government in Britain and Saudi Arabia and dignity for inmates at Guantamo Bay
‘The United States must stand for freedom, republican government and human dignity.’
The problem with this statement is that it is aspirational rhetoric. It is not a reflection of how the US actually behaves.
When asked what he thought of western civilisation, Gandhi famously replied that he thought it would be a good idea. Similarly, I think it would be a good idea if the US stood for ‘freedom, republican government and human dignity.’ But it doesnt. It says it does, but the 70 years of history since WW2 abundantly demonstrates that it doesnt.