Sunday, June 03, 2007

What Next For America?

Fareed Zakaria has written a great column about what America can do after Bush leaves office to get the country back on the right track internationally. I'll post some excerpts after the jump, but I agree with virtually every word in the essay. Really good stuff.

Having spooked ourselves into believing that we have no option but to act fast, alone, unilaterally and pre-emptively, we have managed in six years to destroy decades of international good will, alienate allies, embolden enemies and yet solve few of the major international problems we face...

This distinct American advantage—which testifies to our ability to assimilate new immigrants—is increasingly in jeopardy. If leaders begin insinuating that the entire Muslim population be viewed with suspicion, that will change the community's relationship to the United States. Wiretapping America's mosques and threatening to bomb Mecca are certainly a big step down this ugly road...

We will never be able to prevent a small group of misfits from planning some terrible act of terror. No matter how far-seeing and competent our intelligence and law-enforcement officials, people will always be able to slip through the cracks in a large, open and diverse country. The real test of American leadership is not whether we can make 100 percent sure we prevent the attack, but rather how we respond to it. Stephen Flynn, a homeland-security expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, argues that our goal should be resilience—how quickly can we bounce back from a disruption? In the materials sciences, he points out, resilience is the ability of a material to recover its original shape after a deformation. If one day bombs do go off, we must ensure that they cause as little disruption—economic, social, political—as possible. This would deprive the terrorist of his main objective. If we are not terrorized, then in a crucial sense we have defeated terrorism...

To recover its place in the world, America first needs to recover its confidence. For those who look at the future and see challenges, competition and threats, keep in mind that this new world has been forming over the last 20 years, and the United States has forged ahead amid all the turmoil. In 1980, the U.S. share of global GDP was 20 percent. Today it is 29 percent. We lead the world in technology and research. Our firms have found enormous success in new markets overseas. We continue to generate new products, new brands, new companies and new industries...

Perhaps the most hopeful sign for the United States is that alone among industrial nations, we will not have a shortage of productive citizens in the decades ahead. Unlike Germany, Japan and even China, we should have more than enough workers to grow the economy and sustain the elderly population. This is largely thanks to immigration. If America has a core competitive advantage, it is this: every year we take in more immigrants than the rest of the world put together...

I have no magic formula to stop Iran from going nuclear, nor to change Iran's regime. But the strategy we have adopted against so many troublesome countries over the last few decades—sanction, isolate, ignore, chastise—has simply not worked...

At the end of the day, openness is America's greatest strength. Many people on both sides of the political aisle have ideas that they believe will keep America strong in this new world—fences, tariffs, subsidies, investments. But America has succeeded not because of the ingenuity of its government programs. It has thrived because it has kept itself open to the world—to goods and services, ideas and inventions, people and cultures. This openness has allowed us to respond fast and flexibly in new economic times, to manage change and diversity with remarkable ease, and to push forward the boundaries of freedom and autonomy.


Our openness, our adherence to the rule of law, our dedication to the idea of liberty for all, these are not weaknesses as George Bush, Dick Cheney, and their Republican cheerleaders would have us believe. They are instead the core of our strength, the very things that make us admired by the good and hated by the evil. That is why Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib, torture and war, walls and fear-mongering, illegal wiretapping and the Unitary Executive, are such bad, impractical, foolish, misguided and dangerous ideas. We have shrugged off the mantle of Superman, fighting for Truth, Justice, and the American Way, and assumed the guise of The Punisher, looking to the barrel of a gun to solve all our problems and scorning the very principles that made us great.

We can do better. We must do better. And I think Zakaria is dead-on about how we go about doing that. I strongly encourage you to read the entire original article in its entirety.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

There are two items in todays newspaper that fit into Zaaria's thoughts. One greatly supports his ideas and the other gives a caution. The first is Richard Reeve's column, which in the Baton Rouge newspaper, The Advocate, is titled "We're finally reaching the end of Reagan era." Reeves quotes a lot from Christopher Caldwell, a conservative columnist, and Caldwell "considers the idea that George W. Bush may be remembered as the worst president in history." Reagan's kind treatment, as well as Eisenhower and Clinton (Caldwell's piece called them the three greatest presidents since WWII) is due to the way they forced American's to view their government. Reeves final point is that politics are cyclical, and the GOP has simply run out of ideas. I would add that the basic appeal of Reagan was his ability that communism as practiced by the USSR was flawed and would inevitably implode- and his ability to communicate optomism and hope to the world. (Okay, he let spending get out of control, just as W. did- oh how I yearn for gridlock-sigh, but we are talking foreign policy here!)
A second item that caught my eye, though, was in an article by Larry McShane, an AP writer about using informants to foil terrorist plots. A Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said on CBS's "Face the Nation" summed up my worry best: "It's a movement. It's a philosophy. And they're motivated by the same hatred that motivates al-Qaida." I was chillingly reminded that the terrorists they were talking about are American citizens, and they are NOT getting supplies from Arabs nor the middle east but from Trinidad and Guyana. We may disagree on how to fight the enemy. Indeed, we may even disagree on who or what the enemy is and is not. But lets agree that there are forces that want the USA wiped out.
Finally. though, I agree with Jeff. I agreed with the column nearly 100%- and thanks for the link, the whole column is even better than the portion.
Jimmy