Rudy And the American Hegemony

By Cernig Rudy Giuliani has published his first major exposition of his foreign policy program at the Council On Foreign Relations webmag, Foreign Affairs. I'm going to wade through it and come back (maybe tomorrow) with some more thoughts, but at first glance its pure copperplate neoconservative hawkism. The article begins in a depressingly predictable way - with the sentence "We are all members of the 9/11 generation" hanging above everything else, all on its lonesome. Could someone please tell Rudy his repeated playing on his debatable 9/11 laurels is getting old? Then he sets out the challenges as he sees them - or to be precise, challenge, in the singular. The "war on terror" is the driving force and only real challenge to US foreign policy, in Rudy's view: We have responded forcefully to the Terrorists' War on Us, abandoning a decadelong -- and counterproductive -- strategy of defensive reaction in favor of a vigorous offense. And we have set in motion changes to the international system that promise a safer and better world for generations to come. But this war will be long, and we are still in its early stages. Much like at the beginning of the Cold War, we are at the dawn of a new era in global affairs, when old ideas have to be rethought and new ideas have to be devised to meet new challenges. The next U.S. president will face three key foreign policy challenges. First and foremost will be to set a course for victory in the terrorists' war on global order. The second will be to strengthen the international system that the terrorists seek to destroy. The third will be to extend the benefits of the international system in an ever-widening arc of security and stability across the globe. The most effective means for achieving these goals are building a stronger defense, developing a determined diplomacy, and expanding our economic and cultural influence. Using all three, the next president can build the foundations of a lasting, realistic peace. No mention of climate change, humanitarian missions, third world poverty, nuclear proliferation among states or re-building international alliances as challenges in and of themselves, seperate from any relation to the "war on terror". It seems so single-mindedly dumb, just more of the neoconservative same. Such a contrast to Bill Richardson's more nuanced view. And how is the single great challenge to be faced? With more Divine Mandate crap and colonialism in all its forms. America is a nation that loves peace and hates war. At the core of all Americans is the belief that all human beings have certain inalienable rights that proceed from God but must be protected by the state. Americans believe that to the extent that nations recognize these rights within their own laws and customs, peace with them is achievable. To the extent that they do not, violence and disorder are much more likely. Preserving and extending American ideals must remain the goal of all U.S. policy, foreign and domestic. Realism, writes Rudy, must be subordinated to that over-arching idealism of American hegemony. That's just the first page, and I'm really hoping it gets better. So far, it's just pandering to the base, switching around words so that they can vote for staying the course while pretending to want change. More later.