Against a new American isolationism
updated 11:28 AM EST, Sat December 14, 2013
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
- Glenn: Top Republicans are betting presidential aspirations that Americans want to stay out of global hotspots
- New survey shows 88% of Americans agreed
- Glenn: But Americans are looking for leadership, not conflict, in a more dangerous world
- Poll also shows three-quarters of Americans say that U.S. has a responsibility to be a moral leader for the world
Editor's note: John K.
Glenn is policy director at the U.S. Global Leadership Coalition and a
member of the Agenda Working Group for the Halifax International
Security Forum.
(CNN) -- At a moment when diplomacy is back in the
international spotlight, are Americans becoming more isolationist,
wanting the United States to pull back from the world?
You might think so listening to Washington.
Republicans like Sens.
Ted Cruz and Rand Paul are betting their presidential aspirations on it.
Democratic strategist Doug Sosnik released a memo
identifying "pull back from the rest of the world" as the No. 1 area of
consensus across the political spectrum ahead of the 2014 elections.
And, at first, it looks like they may be on to something. But as you dig deeper, you might see they are missing the point.
John K. Glenn
Yes, poll after poll has
shown that if you ask Americans to choose between focusing on problems
at home or abroad, they overwhelmingly call for focusing at home.
A recent IPSOS/Halifax International Security Forum poll released
last week found an overwhelming 88% of Americans agreed. Along with the
Obama administration's inability to muster congressional support for
limited military strikes against Syria (and the British failure to win
approval in their parliament), this is often seen as the latest sign of
war-weary populations that don't want anything to do with international
entanglements.
Yet, a closer look at how
Americans think about the world today provides a note of caution before
joining the isolationist bandwagon.
Americans are clearly
reluctant to support military intervention. They may agree with former
Secretary of Defense Bob Gates, that anyone "who advises the president
to again send a big American land army into Asia or into the Middle East
or Africa should 'have his head examined.'"
But rather than pulling
back, Americans are looking for leadership to tackle today's most
difficult global challenges, even if they aren't always sure how to deal
with them.
What in the World? Ukraine protests
Ukraine's tug-of-war
Syrian rebel leader denies he fled
The world seems a more
dangerous place than just three years ago. Compared with 2010, the poll
shows that 22% more Americans see a nuclear or chemical attack in the
world as a real threat, and 13% more Americans see a terrorist attack in
their country as a real threat.
Over this time, support
for global engagement through civilian means of diplomacy and
development has stayed surprisingly stable.
Three-quarters of
Americans agree that their country has a responsibility to be a moral
leader for the world, a figure largely unchanged since 2010. They
support economic sanctions against countries that behave badly and
helping to respond to natural disasters or famines. Even after a decade
of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, majorities agree their country should
help the growth of democracy and assist countries with less developed
economies.
The problem is that
Americans aren't sure what will work in today's challenging world. Take
Syria. It's amazing to see that 66% of Americans supported the deal to
place Syria's chemical weapons under international control, while only
36% of them believed it will succeed.
Americans know that
today's global threats rarely have military solutions and no longer
resemble the Cold War conflicts between strong states. An overwhelming
majority say that, in today's world, economic power is more important
than military power -- as do most people around the world.
But if you ask Americans
whether under some conditions war is necessary to obtain justice,
three-quarters of Americans still agree, unlike most Europeans and
Canadians. It is sobering to note that only in China is there stronger
support for war at 80%.
Part of the challenge is
that Americans know the United States cannot solve today's global
problems alone, but we are hardly unique in wanting to focus on economic
problems at home. Among the 20 countries surveyed in the IPSOS/Halifax
poll, every country but Sweden felt it should focus more on problems at
home. Even 75% of Canadians agree, and Canada is the country the rest of
the world regularly sees as having the most positive influence on the
world.
While the economy has
slowly been showing signs of recovery, perhaps the desire to focus on
problems at home is the continued hangover from the financial crisis. It
turns out that there is only a modest difference in support for global
engagement among Americans who see the economy negatively, with about
10% fewer (but still majorities) agreeing.
The drop-off among those
who see the economy negatively is greater (about 30%) on support for
assisting countries with less developed economies. This suggests that
policymakers and global development advocates need to do a better job
making the economic argument that today's fastest-growing economies are
in the developing world, not in our traditional trading partners in
Europe and Japan, and that the emerging middle classes in Brazil, India,
China and across Africa are the new markets for goods and services. All
signs are that business understands this, but the public may not yet.
We're seeing a
remarkable resurgence of diplomacy, whether in the first steps toward a
deal to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons or in the Middle
East peace process. But the passionate reactions against the Iran
agreement suggest that some have come to see diplomacy as weakness.
This is unfortunate, as
Americans are looking for leadership, not conflict, in a world that they
feel is growing ever more dangerous. Let's hope that cooler heads will
prevail in the months ahead and see this as an opportunity for the
United States to work with our allies to lower the temperature and work
to build a safer world.
No comments:
Post a Comment