Trends to Look Out For in 2019: a Primer in World Affairs
by Tejal Pendekanti
The year is 1945. Germany has surrendered, just 8 days ago. The western world is rejoicing. But mostly praying, I think. For the souls of the thousands of soldiers ravaged by the new warfare--Blitzkreig, fighter planes, the atomic bomb. For the uncertain future broken by more the blood nations, but by a generational fear. Nothing poetic here, no beauty in pain, no silver lining found in blackened sky.
I think President Harry Truman knows this. The stench of rotting human flesh cannot so easily be scrubbed from Poland, but he must face it, as does Stalin, Churchill, and Attlee. They are in Poland to decide the future of Europe, of the world. Each has their own agenda to promote their country. But I think that Truman can hear the haunting whispers of the victims and soldiers immortalized. I think he wants to ensure that another war doesn’t happen, and so he leads the conference to establish a new world order through American intervention. How naive of him to think that.
---
There’s a loooottttttt of different issues that have to do with ‘foreign relations.’ Honestly, I don’t know how our founder even thought of lumping all of it into one category, but ok. Since after World War II, the United States took leadership of the global order to ensure that “democracy was preserved” and “peace was upheld.” However, the United States isn’t always that democracy-preserving, peace-loving country; it’s done some pretty shitty things to benefit itself at the hands of others. Thus, this primer hopes to provide a holistic view of America’s foreign relations.
Some terms if you’re lost:
Hegemon: dominant leader in a region or industry
OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries): a group of countries that essentially decide oil prices; comprised of some of the largest oil exporters
Power vacuum: when there is no successor to power after the previous owner relinquishes it
The Cold War: heightened tensions and proxy wars between the United States and the USSR (today’s Russia) to gain power/influence abroad; America won
Proxy war: a war in which opposite sides are backed by rivaling, powerful nations so that they don’t have to directly fight each other (e.g. Vietnam War)
Isolationism: the political principle or practice of showing interest only in your own country and not being involved in international activities
Non-interventionism: similar to isolationism, but specifically means not involving your country in conflicts unless it is truly VERY important
Lay of the land:
Historical trends: America as a World Leader in the Era of Globalization
After World War II, America truly became a world power. Although it was becoming more dominant on the world stage in the early 1900s, the power vacuum created by the destruction of European and Asian countries finally allowed America to become the powerful nation we know it as today. Although USSR (today’s Russia) challenged this rise to power (the Cold War), they were ultimately defeated, symbolized by the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1991.
During the Cold War and after, the United States was known as the harbinger of peace, the safeguard of democracy. Usually, the US involved itself with other countries to ensure that democracy was instilled to ensure long-lasting peace (e.g. created democratic government in Japan). However, the US also acted not so benevolently in other parts of the world, mostly to curb the influence of communism (e.g. instituted a brutal military regime in Chile).
In trying to allegedly protect the world from itself, the United States also got involved in TONS of international organizations. Some were purely to ensure that the world will never see an equally devastating war as WWII (e.g. United Nations). Others were to protect the countries from communism, or more specifically the USSR (e.g. NATO). The rest were a result of globalization; the new world of interconnectedness needed governing bodies to ensure that chaos (political or economic) was avoided (e.g. IMF).
Ultimately, the United States became a world hegemon to protect its interests by exerting its influence directly (action in countries) and indirectly (organizations).
Things to look out for in 2019
Yet the United States is starting move away from this trend. No, President Trump isn’t the first president of the contemporary era to move towards political isolationism. In fact, it started with President Obama. Some examples: didn’t do anything when Putin illegally crashed down on Ukraine, didn’t confront Russia and Iran for their roles in the Syrian Civil War, didn’t react when Bashar Al-Assad used chemical weapons (again, illegally!!) on his people.
Trump has followed suit, but in much more extreme way. He is removing troops from the Syrian Civil War, pulling out of international organizations, disagreeing with Bush’s war in Iraq (something truly ~scandalous~ coming from the right). But even without these examples, you obviously know that Trump is favoring a more isolationist doctrine because one of his campaign slogans was literally “America First.”
From here, we need to see how this new policy of stepping away from the global stage will play out. Will it propel America into “greatness”? Will it plunge the world into chaos? Will other countries step up and help? Or are we moving towards a new political era of isolationism? I don’t know; no one does.
Why Do We Need to Care?
Because who else is going to? The experts and politicians who are so focused on these ideas are going to die in literally 10 years. We will be the only ones left, and somehow we’ll have to run the world. And we need to know what we’re doing. That’s why we need your opinions, your findings, your questions! Let’s discuss these things and figure out how this will create our future.
TL;DR:
The United States has a lot of hands in a lot of different jars. It’s tricky for the United States to advance their interests in such a globalized world without dealing with/encouraging some Shady™ countries; it’s a delicate balance that no one can agree upon.
More Readings:
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/isolationism
https://www.britannica.com/event/Potsdam-Conference
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-07/trump-lays-out-non-interventionist-us-military-policy/8100970
https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/4/14/15290394/intervention-isolation-trump-america-first-syria
https://iapss.org/2016/02/02/the-myth-of-obamas-non-interventionism/
https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/06/03/the-bloody-toll-of-non-intervention/