|
|
|
 |
BOOK
REVIEW Unilateralism fails global
tests The Superpower
Myth: The Use and Abuse of American Might
by Nancy Soderberg
Reviewed by Gary
LaMoshi
The 2004 US presidential election
is likely to confound historians for years to come
over this question: How could Bush win despite the
blot of an unnecessary war in Iraq on his record?
In her new book The Superpower Myth,
Clinton administration foreign-policy expert Nancy
Soderberg inadvertently provides a compelling
hypothesis.
That's not her reason for
writing, though. Formerly No 3 at the US National
Security Council and an ambassador to the United
Nations, Soderberg aims to compare the foreign
policies of the Bill Clinton and George W Bush
presidencies. The superpower myth of the book's
title reflects Soderberg's analysis of the two
administrations' divergent world views.
Soderberg contends that the dominant
faction of the first-term Bush foreign-policy team
believes that, as the world's only superpower, the
United States can act unilaterally and bend the
world to its will. These so-called hegemons
include Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his deputy, Paul
Wolfowitz. They were countered by realists, led by
secretary of state Colin Powell. National security
adviser Condoleezza Rice abdicated her
responsibility to moderate between the two sides,
and Bush initially vacillated between the
competing views.
Then came the September
11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and the balance
overwhelmingly shifted to the hegemons, according
to Soderberg, though the Afghanistan invasion
followed the realist playbook. The invasion of
Iraq represented the pinnacle of hegemons'
influence but also sowed the seeds of their
demise, since that adventure has failed to deliver
any of the benefits the hegemons promised.
'Disconnection with
reality' Soderberg skewers the
hegemons for their "disconnection with reality".
She cites (repeatedly) Wolfowitz's line, "Just
because the FBI and CIA have failed to find the
linkages [between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda]
does not mean they don't exist." During the 2004
campaign, Cheney made the same argument about
Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction.
In Soderberg's analysis, the failure to
win the peace in Iraq has driven the hegemons into
retreat. The Bush administration has been forced
to revisit the institutions and allies it rejected
before the invasion. It has called back the United
Nations, reached out to traditional European
allies, and found its policy shaped by events on
the ground, rather than policy dictating events.
Soderberg's conclusions remain open to
debate. Her own review of Bush's first term
indicates that the hegemons' victory after
September 11 was less than total. Similarly,
rumors of their demise may be greatly exaggerated.
Bush's recent selection of vociferous
unilateralist John Bolton as ambassador to the UN
and Wolfowitz as World Bank president indicates
that the hegemons are alive, are well, and still
have the president's ear.
Most important,
though, Soderberg offers nothing new about the
Bush people and their policies. Soderberg, now a
vice president at the International Crisis Group
think-tank, presents neither exclusive information
nor stunning insights into the Bush presidency.
'Tough engagement' By contrast,
Soderberg's insider perspectives on the Clinton
administration, comprising about half the book,
are quite useful. Soderberg explains Clinton's
strategy of "tough engagement", rejecting the
extremes of isolationism and imperialism, and
recognizing that even the world's only superpower
needs allies and international institutions to
share burdens and set rules, though in some cases
the US might have to act alone.
Soderberg's glimpses into the
decision-making process provide key insights. The
most telling conclusion from the review is that
every administration's grand designs and guiding
principles get subsumed by events and
circumstances. In short, the world never goes
according to any president or foreign-policy
guru's plan. It was true for Clinton's team, and
is undoubtedly true for their successors.
One surprise is the low grade Soderberg
gives Colin Powell for his performance as chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff - the top US military
officer - at the start of Clinton's presidency.
Her view may have been colored by Powell's
presumed 1996 presidential aspirations. In
reality, though, under Clinton, Powell did exactly
what Soderberg praised him for doing under Bush -
present the president with independent thinking.
In both cases, if his view didn't prevail, Powell
fell in line behind his boss.
According to
Soderberg, Clinton's foreign policy charted new
ground for addressing conflicts in non-strategic
areas in a post-Cold War context. Chastened by the
October 1993 deaths of 18 US Rangers in Somalia
while fulfilling a mandate written by the
administration of George H W Bush, Clinton's team
learned that superpower status didn't guarantee
success. But it remained committed to the idea
that small conflicts could grow to challenge vital
interests and, therefore, were worth solving. In
the Balkans and Haiti, the administration found
diplomacy backed with force an effective tool for
resolving conflicts.
Soderberg doesn't
follow that logic to a possible conclusion about
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that Clinton
tried mightily to resolve. Clinton hosted the
historic 1994 interim agreement and handshake
between Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin and
Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, and, in 2000,
led an unsuccessful full court press for a final
accord. Soderberg offers a number of reasons for
the failure, but misses the lesson of Bosnia,
Haiti and Kosovo: there was no credible threat of
force accompanying US diplomacy. In the Balkans,
US bombing raids helped persuade Balkan leaders to
make peace, but that option wasn't used against
Israeli or Palestinian targets.
No land
is an island Even an unrivaled superpower
can't solve all of the world's problems or respond
to every challenge. In a sobering and disarmingly
honest chapter, Soderberg recounts how and why the
US and the international community failed to stop
the genocide in Rwanda. Her conclusion is that, if
the same situation arose tomorrow in another - say
Darfur in Sudan - the world would again watch and
weep rather than act decisively to end it.
Less welcome is the catalogue of Clinton
administration steps in its fight against
terrorism, its efforts to capture or kill Osama
bin Laden, and its attempts to contain Iraq. These
bureaucratic laundry lists seem more intent on
deflecting Clinton's critics than providing
original insights and information. Here and
occasionally elsewhere, such as discussing the
dangers of failed states, accounts seem filtered
through the prism of subsequent events to defend
Clinton and his team.
Warning: Excessive
hindsight can be harmful to your legacy. If the
Clinton administration really took al-Qaeda as
seriously for as long as Soderberg suggests, then
why didn't it dedicate the same level of resources
and prestige to destroying al-Qaeda that it did
to, for example, restoring Jean-Bertrand Aristide
to Haiti's presidency? While Aristide's return was
a worthy goal - one the Bush administration
gleefully undid - the terror treat to the US
merited far greater attention.
Overall,
The Superpower Myth contextualizes
Clinton's foreign policy more successfully than
either Bill Clinton or subsequent Democratic
presidential candidates have managed. Comparing
and contrasting that vision with Bush policies may
hold the key to the 2004 election mystery.
The Clinton vision says that the US can't
do it alone. It needs to make friends, compromise,
and show patience to get its way in the world. The
Bush vision says that's ridiculous. Since the US
has overwhelming military and economic power, why
shouldn't it always get its way? After all, it can
- and with this cowboy in the saddle, Bush
assures, will, as done in Iraq and Afghanistan -
wipe out any country foolish enough to defy it.
Crystallizing and comparing these two visions may
lack the intellectual heft to support more than a
journal article, but the contrast between the
views packs enough punch among voters to turn an
election.
The Superpower Myth: The Use
and Abuse of American Might by Nancy
Soderberg. John Wiley & Sons, 2005, Hoboken,
New Jersey. ISBN: 0-471-65683-6. Price: US$24.95,
404 pages.
(Copyright 2005 Asia Times
Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us
for information on sales, syndication and republishing.) |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
All material on this
website is copyright and may not be republished in any form without written
permission.
© Copyright 1999 - 2005 Asia Times
Online Ltd.
|
|
Head
Office: Rm 202, Hau Fook Mansion, No. 8 Hau Fook St., Kowloon, Hong
Kong
Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
|
|
|
|