Search the Community

Article: http://www.hoover.org/research/pax-americana-dead Interesting article, even more interesting comments after it. Discussion ??s 1. Is Pax Americana dead? 2. Has Pax Americana been good for the world? 3. To answer # 2 one may need to ask: what would the world be like if not for the umbrella of American military and economic might since the early 1900s? 4. If Pax Americana is over, what should replace it? 5. Is the article correct in stating that Obama's lack of being decisive (and non-involvement) causing all of the world hotspots to ignite. Has Obama's actions been an over-reaction to GWB too gung-ho 'cowboy' foreign policy? 6. With Hilary's distancing from Obama's Syria strategy, is she trying to position herself as the 'just right' potential president between GWB and Obama? My thoughts: 1. It is dead during this presidency. Obama has loss creditability with his lines in the sands, his weak defense of allies, and his rhetoric that doesn't scare foes or builds trust with our friends. 2. & 3 Overall, yes. American had to get involve in WW1, WW2 and Korea to stop totalitarianism from taking over the world. We rebuild Europe and Japan and we have fostered trade with former enemies since then - Vietnam, China, etc. Our strength economically has helped the world through direct foreign aid and indirectly via the World Trade Organization, IMF, the UN, etc. Militarily: we have for the most part kept various thugs from conquering many nations. However, I do think we have at times overstepped into areas we didn't need to get involved in and overstayed our welcome in other places. At other times we 'pulled our puches' too much instead of going for 'total surrender (Vietnam and 1st Gulf War) GWB's nation building concept was an overstep. You can't force democracy on a people who culturally aren't ready for it. I do wonder if we were less dependent on M.E. oil, if we'd be much less involved in the gulf. Our support of Israel alone may have kept us tied up there. Without Pax Amer - we might all be speaking German or Russian. The Cold War would have been much different and may still be going on. 4. I don't think Pax Americana needs to be over or should be over. I do think it needs to be defined better. No more nation building. More real partnerships for the purpose of building good and stopping bad. I think the world needs America to be strong and to have strong leadership to make peace work. If there is not a good structure in place to replace Pax Amer, then a vacuum is filled by what we see going on in Syria/Iraq and other places. We give the thugs the courage to step out of the shadows. 5. A. - Not all hot spots as some would've started regardless of who was president. and B. - Yes - Obama giving dates when he says we will leave Iraq and Afgan seem more to please his political promises/agenda/needs than good policy. ( Now Obama passes the buck again for Iraq withdrawal - blame GWB, others) His drawing lines in the sand and not doing anything allows the thugs to be bold. I think he was trying too hard to be the anti-GWB. 6. Yes - we all know the Clinton's - it isn't about core convictions but about political posturing for personal gain. The once loyal SOS is now having to put on her political hat and distance herself from an increasingly unpopular president (now at 40%). Definitions: http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Pax_Americana.html Pax Americana[1][2][3] (Latin for "American Peace") is an appellation applied to the historical concept of relative peace in the Western hemisphere and, later, the Western world, resulting from the preponderance of power enjoyed by the United States of America starting around the turn of the 20th century. Although the term finds its primary utility in the later half of the 20th century, it has been used in various places and eras, such as the post United States Civil War Era in North America[4] and globally during the time between the Great World Wars.[2] Pax Americana is primarily used in its modern connotations concerning the peace established after the end of World War II in 1945. In this modern sense, the term has come to indicate the military and economic position of the United States in relation to other nations. The term derives from and is inspired by the Pax Romana of the Roman empire, the Pax Britannica of the British Empire and the Pax Mongolica of the Mongol Empire.[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pax_Americana Pax Americana is primarily used in its modern connotations to refer to the peace among great powers established after the end of World War II in 1945, also called the long peace. In this modern sense, it has come to indicate the military and economic position of the United States in relation to other nations. For example the Marshall Plan, which spent $13 billion to rebuild the economy of Western Europe, has been seen as "the launching of the pax americana."[5]