(image via rks.uky)
"Skeptics of soft power (Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld professes not even to understand the term) claim that popularity is ephemeral and should not guide foreign policy. The United States, they assert, is strong enough to do as it wishes with or without the world's approval and should simply accept that others will envy and resent it. The world's only superpower does not need permanent allies; the issues should determine the coalitions, not vice-versa, according to Rumsfeld." Joseph Nye, Jr. The Decline of America's Soft Power, Foreign Affairs
Is it possible that Nations, upon achieving Sole Superpower Status, inevitably veer towards apex predatory behavior? Think: Great White Sharks off the Great Barrier Reef, or Spotted Hyenas in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Clearly, insecurity is the most primal geopolitical motive. The entire theory of the balance-of-power is based upon a peace based on minimal regional insecurity. We would argue, further, that the very concept of a national quest for Power pre-supposes insecurity. One might even argue -- if said skeptic had a few martini's in him -- that similarly Individuals, like Nations, are so governed.
But back to Nations. Donald Rumsfeld's -- and similar foreign policy hawks -- inability to understand, and even ridicule diplomacy as effete, "Venusian" and weak suggests that there might be a biological connection between the psychologies of Sole Superpowers operating geopolitically and, curiously, Apex Predators acting locally.
Are Apex Nations destined to behave disharmoniously among the parliament of Nations by their very Nature? Because they can?
And yet, How much more Powerful would an Apex Nation be if it not only wielded unquestionable military strength as well as the highest degree of Soft Power, through a respected civilization and a universally recognized sense of even-handedness in dealing with foreigners?
No comments:
Post a Comment