What is at stake for global geopolitics with the US elections

As the 2024 US presidential election approaches, Three sides are distinguished in the American debate on the country's relations with the rest of the world: the liberal internationalists, in charge since World War II; the supporters of entrenchment, who wish to withdraw from some alliances and institutions, and those who wish to prioritize their country by following to the letter the slogan of 'America first', whose vision of that country's role in the world is narrow and, not with infrequently, isolationist.

For a long time Americans perceive their country as exceptional from a moral point of view. Stanley Hoffmann, a French-American intellectual, said that although all countries see themselves as unique, France and the United States stand out for believing their values ​​are universal.
France, however, was limited by the European balance of power and was therefore unable to devote itself entirely to realizing its universalist ambitions. Only the United States had enough power to do so.

The point is not that Americans are morally superior, but that many of them want to believe that their country is a force for good in the world. Realists have long complained that this moralism of American foreign policy interferes with a clearer, more realistic analysis of power. However, the truth is that American liberal political culture made an enormous difference to the liberal international order that has existed in the world since World War II. The world today would be very different if Hitler had been the victor or Stalin's Soviet Union had prevailed in the Cold War.

American exceptionalism has a triple origin: Since 1945, the dominant root has been the legacy of the Enlightenment (specifically, the liberal ideas promoted by its founders). As President John F. Kennedy said: “The magical power that accompanies us is the desire of every person to be free and of every nation to be independent (…). Because I believe that our system is more in line with the essence of human nature, I believe that we will triumph in the end.” Enlightenment liberalism maintains that these rights are universal and not limited to the United States.

(Read: Blinken says he wants to make sure the conflict in the Middle East does not spread)

Of course, Americans always faced contradictions in the implementation of their liberal ideology. The scourge of slavery was inscribed in its Constitution and just after more than a century of the civil war, Congress approved the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Racism remains one of the important factors in American politics today.

There was also dissent among Americans over how to foster liberal values ​​in foreign policy. For some, The universalist project became an excuse to invade other countries and impose favorable regimes. Racism undoubtedly influenced American interventions in places like Mexico, Haiti, and the Philippines. For others, however, liberalism was the impetus that allowed the creation of a system of international law and institutions that protected local freedom by moderating international anarchy.

The religious theme

A second variant of American exceptionalism derives from its Puritan religious roots. Those who escaped Britain to worship God more purely in the New World saw themselves as a chosen people. The nature of his project was little short of a crusade that, in a combination of hunger and restriction – much like the current 'entrenchment' approach – seeks to turn America into a mountain town to attract others.

(Also: Gold bars and F1 tickets: the plot that entangles the most powerful Latino in the US)
​
The founders themselves were worried that the new Republic would lose its virtue, as had happened to the Roman Republic. In the 19th century, European visitors as diverse as Alexis de Tocqueville and Charles Dickens noted the American obsession with virtue, progress and collapsebut this moral concern looked more inward than outward.

The third source of American exceptionalism underlies indisputable geographical factors: The location and size of the United States always gave it a geopolitical advantage. Already in the 19th century, de Tocqueville noted the special geographical situation of the United States that, protected by two oceans and flanked by weaker neighbors, was able to focus largely on westward expansion during the 19th century and avoid the Eurocentric struggle for world power.

Historical contexts

But When the United States became the largest economy in the early 20th century, it began to think in terms of global power. After all, he had the resources, the freedom of action, and ample opportunities to indulge, for better or worse.

It had the incentives and capabilities to take the lead in creating global public goods, as well as the freedom to define its national interests broadly. That implied support an open international trade system, the free navigability of the seas and other common goods, as well as the development of international institutions. It should be emphasized that size gives American exceptionalism an important realistic basis that should not be underestimated.

(Keep reading: Still polarized, Brazil marks the first anniversary of the Bolsonaro uprising)

Isolationism was the American response to the global balance of power of the 19th century. The American republic, relatively weak, could behave in an imperialist manner towards its neighbors, but He had to maintain a cautiously realistic policy towards the European powers.
​
Although the Monroe Doctrine affirmed the separation between the Western Hemisphere and the European balance, The reality is that it was only possible to maintain that policy because it coincided with British interests and the Royal Navy's control of the seas.
​
But as American power grew, so did its options. A major turning point occurred in 1917, when President Woodrow Wilson broke tradition and sent two million Americans to fight in Europe. Although the liberal League of Nations that Wilson created at the end of the war was repudiated by his compatriots, it laid the foundations of the United Nations and the liberal order after 1945.

Today, President Joe Biden and most Democrats say they want to maintain and protect the existing order, while Donald Trump and America First supporters want to abandon it… and entrenchment advocates in both parties hope to elect among what is left standing.

(Also: What Russia is looking for with the dramatic increase in missile and drone attacks against Ukraine)

Current European, Asian and Middle Eastern conflicts will be deeply affected by the prevailing approach. in this year's elections… That is why the United States presidential elections are important not only for that country, but for the entire world.

JOSEPH S. NYE, JR.

© PROJECT SYNDICATE

CAMBRIDGE

Professor at Harvard University and former United States Undersecretary of Defense. Author of 'Do Morals Matter? Presidents and Foreign Policy from FDR to Trump' (Oxford University Press, 2020) and 'A Life in the American Century' (Polity Press, January 2024). Three key issues at play today The United States' role in current conflicts in Europe, Asia and the Middle East is essential and translates into vital economic, military and political support.

Their participation in these disputes responds to geopolitical and economic interests, but also to values ​​such as defending democracy and security at a global level, while allowing that country to confirm itself as the great world power. These are the current conflicts in which Washington has a crucial influence today:

Russian invasion of Ukraine:

Since February 24, 2022, when Russia mobilized its troops towards Ukraine to claim its supposed rights over that country, the United States, together with NATO, has given its full support to Volodymyr Zelensky and the Ukrainian people. The Biden administration has transferred more than $75 billion in military assistance to Ukraine, aid that is in question today due to Republican opposition to continuing to support that conflict. (Keep reading: Russia launches more than 40 missile and drone attacks on Ukraine in one week)

Israel-Hamas conflict: After the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, in which more than 1,200 Israelis died, the United States gave its support to Israel and has been the only country on the United Nations Security Council that has opposed the proposal. of a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip, where more than 22,000 people have died. Although President Biden has had his reservations about the disproportion in the counteroffensive, in which the majority of the dead are civilians, the United States considers that the United Nations has not forcefully condemned the Islamist terrorist group's attack on Israel on October 7. The relationship between the United States and Israel is close and vital, since that country is the Western bastion in the Middle East.

Tensions between China and Taiwan: