This Tuesday I went to see one of LSE’s public lectures entitled: ‘The Foreign Policy Dilemmas of the US Administration in the Next Four Years.’ The speaker was Professor John Coatsworth, provost and professor of international and public affairs at Columbia University. The lecture was incredibly interesting, with Professor Coatsworth doing his best to cover future American foreign policy in the Middle East, Asia and Latin America in the short space of an hour. Of course, there were some predictable moments, but this was largely because US foreign policy in the next four years will remain predictable: most of its foreign policy actions will be directed mainly towards the Middle East, and it will have to pay increasing attention towards the ‘pivot’ to Asia.
However, despite the predictability of future US foreign policy, Professor Coatsworth’s analysis introduced some enlightening points to consider when assessing Obama’s second term. He began the lecture by pointing out the two major long-term challenges that will now confront the US in the IR arena: (1) Can the US effectively deploy its current resources of both hard and soft power to regulate international institutions sufficiently enough to protect its security for a future when it will no longer be a world power? (2) Can it use the same hard and soft power resources to secure the global community’s capacity to make life on earth sustainable? In other words, will the US have sufficient leverage to enable it to contribute to the global community’s response to climate change and human development? These questions, argues Coatsworth, are intimately linked and, the success of the former may depend on the success of the latter.
After establishing the initial goals of future US foreign policy, Coatsworth describes what this policy is most likely to resemble in each continent. The Middle East will be the top priority. The US will continue to lead from behind in the region but this strategy is not likely to be successful, as Obama wants Europe to step up and thus this will not produce a sufficiently aggressive foreign policy. This also ties in with current US strategy of staying out of Syria, and using other means to influence events there, which is likely to continue. The most notable difference will be in terms of Israeli-Iranian relations, with regards to response time to Iran’s nuclear program. How this plays out will take time, but the US position is that no military action is needed until there is clear evidence Iran will use nuclear weapons while Israel believes they must strike as soon as Iran is nearing capacity to develop nuclear weapons. This difference in calendar may prove crucial in events that occur in future US foreign policy in the Middle East; however, it is likely that the US calendar will prevail.
In terms of East Asia, America’s main problem will be how to manage China. How will the US balance the need for geo-politics in the rest of Asia vs. China rise, against economic partnership with China? What is critical is that these two impulses of the US do not subvert one or the other; and this will be difficult to achieve.
Finally, in terms of Latin America, US policy will be influenced by its slow decline of influence in the region as other economic partners become more important. There will be shrinkage of US leverage, while the current policy of continuing to deal with left-wing regimes on a bi-lateral basis will continue. What is uncertain is the extent to which the US will attempt to reconcile its differences with Cuba; however, given the inability of both sides to compromise, the situation is unlikely to change.
Overall, Coatsworth’s lecture emphasizes the continuation of a pattern in US foreign policy during the next four years. American relative decline will most likely be a major factor in the way it conducts its foreign policy, however, only time will tell how relative or absolute this decline really is. What can be assumed is that the way in which the US conducts its foreign policy in the next four years will most likely depend on the actions of others, and how they imposetheir foreign policy agendas on the US and not the other way round. This is a different course for the US – maybe its decline isn’t too far away after all…
By Amanda Felberg
Image Source: Telegraph
Amanda Felberg represented The London Globalist at “The Foreign Policy Dilemmas of the US Administration in the Next Four Years” lecture delivered by Professor John Coatsworth and chaired by Professor Stuart Corbridge at the LSE campus on 22 January 2013. We are thankful to LSE Conferences and Public Events for granting us access to the event. You can watch the event here.
Author
The Author
