Decline of US Influence a Long-Term Trend

Published in Huanqiu
(China) on 30 December 2014
by Wo Xin Bo (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Kartoa Chow. Edited by Nicholas Eckart.
If Barack Obama was already showing signs of weakness in 2013, then 2014 would be the year he fell into utter vulnerability. In today’s international community, powerful leaders continually emerge, yet the leader of the world’s sole superpower is in an unprecedented position of weakness. This weakness largely reflects the complexity and shift in international position that the United States is currently facing through foreign competition.

The complexity of foreign competition faced by the U.S. is demonstrated mainly by four aspects. First, strategic competitive rivals have begun to challenge American interests. The strong revival of Russia’s strategy and the economic and strategic rise of China pose the most threatening geopolitical challenge for the U.S. since the end of the Cold War. Second, American allies such as the European Union, Israel and Japan are acting more independently. Third, the conflict between the U.S. and the Muslim world has no solution. The rise of the Islamic State set off a new wave of terrorist threats. Fourth, the functions of the international mechanisms led by the U.S. are being degraded, and the world needs new forms of global governance. The U.S. is now facing challenges more threatening and diverse within the international community, making it nearly impossible to devise an effective response.

To some extent, Obama’s weakness is a response to the shift in the international position of the United States. First, although the comprehensive national power of the U.S. remains first in the world, its lead is shrinking. Militarily, Russia’s revival and China’s modernization of its military forces have weakened the U.S. military lead. Economically, the U.S. economy accounted for 22.4 percent of the world economy in 2013, the lowest since World War II. Second, American influence on global affairs is in decline. Over the past few years, the number of countries in disagreement with the U.S. on voting behavior at the United Nations has been on the rise. Third, U.S. resources for foreign affairs are shrinking. Under pressure from a huge budget deficit, cuts in military spending will be a long-term trend for the U.S. The proportion of total global foreign aid contributed by Americans is decreasing. Fourth, the United States’ soft power is in decline. The financial crisis has damaged the appeal of the U.S. development model. Domestic political deadlock has greatly reduced the influence of its political system, while the Edward Snowden incident has tarnished its global reputation on morality. Together, these circumstances have caused the international position of the United States to slip to the lowest point in many years.

Evidently, Obama’s weakness was not only caused by himself or by domestic politics, but was also deeply tied to international politics. Although the next U.S. president may have a more decisive personality than Obama, and the polarization of American politics may dissipate, the decline of the American lead in its position and influence is a long-term trend rather than a cyclical phenomenon.

First, American economic recovery is weakening, which indicates that the inherent vitality of the U.S. economic mechanism is in decline. In the second half of the 20th century, the recovery time for each of the two U.S. economic recessions was fairly quick, and the economic aggregate was restored to approximately a third of the world’s value. The recovery this time has been quite long, with its economic aggregate accounting for only about 20 percent of the total. Second, from an international perspective, the strength and position of the U.S. in the 1990s was drastically elevated when the economic bubbles burst in Russia and Japan. Today, the coincidental economic situations in Russia and Japan which greatly benefited American strategy and its economy are unlikely to occur again. Third, due to the economic rise of emerging economies, the U.S. is currently losing its position as an economic superpower.

Against this background, both the U.S. and the world must accept the new role the U.S. has in international affairs. Although the U.S. remains a political and military superpower, Washington’s global approach will begin to change. The U.S. will concentrate its diplomatic and military intervention overseas on areas of importance or significant interest and will use its military force more cautiously. Toward global affairs, it will take on a role of mobilization and organization, when, for example, it will mobilize and organize other nations to implement an international agenda that the U.S supports, rather than lead the fight or fight head-to-head, to further pursue its interests instead of power. U.S. allies and security partners will be asked to take on more responsibility for security issues, thus developing a more intimate collaboration with the United States. Emerging countries such as China will be asked to play a greater role in global governance, with an increasing number of multilateral mechanisms operating in the absence of U.S. leadership or even participation. International politics will gradually become a “new normal” in the post-hegemony era.


  如果说2013年奥巴马已经弱势初显的话,2014年则是他完全陷入弱势的一年。在当今国际社会强势领导人不断涌现的时候,世界唯一超级大国的领导人却处于空前弱势地位。这种弱势也在很大程度上反映了当下美国面临外部挑战的复杂性和美国国际地位的变化。

  美国面临外部挑战的复杂性主要表现在四个方面。首先,战略竞争对手发起挑战。俄罗斯的强势战略复兴以及中国在经济与战略上的崛起,对美国构成冷战结束以来最棘手的地缘政治挑战。其次,欧盟、以色列和日本等美国的盟友越来越自行其是。第三,美国与伊斯兰世界的矛盾无解。伊斯兰国的崛起是恐怖势力掀起的新一波浪潮。第四,美国主导的国际机制的功能在退化,世界需要新的国际治理机制。现在美国在国际上面临的挑战更棘手和多元,这使得它的有效应对成为几乎不可能的任务。

  奥巴马的弱势在一定程度上也是美国国际地位变化的反应。第一,美国综合国力仍是世界第一,但它的优势在缩水。军事上,俄罗斯军事力量重振和中国军事现代化的推进削弱了美国的军事优势。经济上,2013年的美国经济占全球经济总量的22.4%,是二战以来的最低点。第二,美国对国际事务的主导能力在下降。过去数年中,其他国家在联合国与美国的投票行为不一致的比例在上升。第三,美国处理外部事务的资源在缩水。在巨额预算赤字的压力下,美国军费削减将是长期趋势。美国对外援助占世界各国援助总额的比例在下降。第四,美国的软实力在下降。金融危机重创了美国发展模式的吸引力,国内政治僵局使其政治制度的影响力大打折扣,斯诺登事件使美国的国际道义形象黯然失色。这些情况共同导致美国的国际地位处于多年来的最低点。

  由此看来,奥巴马的弱势不仅仅是由于其个人原因或国内政治原因,而是有着深刻的国际政治背景。下一届美国总统可能在性格上比奥巴马更坚定果断,美国政治的极化届时可能会有所改善,但美国优势地位和影响力的下降却是一个长期的趋势,而不是一个周期性现象。

  第一,美国的经济复苏能力在减弱,这表明美国经济机制的内在活力在下降。20世纪后半期的两次美国经济衰退,每次复苏时间都较快,经济总量也都恢复到占世界经济总量的1/3左右,而这次复苏耗时甚长,经济总量也只占世界经济总量的20%左右。第二,从国际层面看,90年代美国力量和地位的大幅提升得益于苏联解体和日本经济泡沫破灭这两大红利,今天不会再同时出现对美国重大的战略与经济利好。第三,由于新兴经济体经济力量的上升,美国正在失去经济超级大国的地位。

  在此大背景下,世界和美国都必须适应美国在国际事务中的新角色。虽然美国仍将是政治和军事超级大国,但华盛顿发挥国际作用的方式会发生重要变化,美国在海外的外交和军事介入将集中在那些有重要或重大利益的地区,对军事力量的运用会更审慎,在世界事务中更多发挥动员和组织的作用,即动员和组织其他国家实施美国支持的国际议程,而不是一马当先或单打独斗,更加注重追求利益而不是权力。美国的盟友和安全伙伴会被要求在安全问题上承担更多责任、与美国开展更密切合作,新兴国家如中国会被要求在全球治理中发挥更大作用,越来越多的多边机制将在没有美国领导甚至参与的情况下运作。国际政治会逐渐形成后霸权时代的“新常态”。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Ireland: The Irish Times View on Turmoil in Los Angeles: Key Test of Trump’s Power

Germany: Horror Show in Oval Office at Meeting of Merz and Trump

Taiwan: The Beginning of a Post-Hegemonic Era: A New Normal for International Relations

Russia: This Can’t Go On Forever*

Mexico: From Star Wars to Golden Domes

Topics

Taiwan: The Beginning of a Post-Hegemonic Era: A New Normal for International Relations

Canada: Trump vs. Musk, the Emperor and the Oligarch

Russia: Trump Is Shielding America*

Germany: Peace Report 2025: No Common Ground with Trump

Australia: America’s Economic and Political Chaos Has Implications for Australia

Ireland: The Irish Times View on Turmoil in Los Angeles: Key Test of Trump’s Power

Germany: Friedrich Merz’s Visit to Trump Succeeded because It Didn’t Fail

Related Articles

Taiwan: The Beginning of a Post-Hegemonic Era: A New Normal for International Relations

Russia: Trump Is Shielding America*

Australia: America’s Economic and Political Chaos Has Implications for Australia

Germany: Friedrich Merz’s Visit to Trump Succeeded because It Didn’t Fail

Germany: US Sanctions against the EU

1 COMMENT

  1. Sure China is a rising power, good for you. We all hope that you can participate in global leadership. Your comments about Russia are backward. They are in a serious decline, albeit with a strong land army and a vast arsenal of nuclear weapons. But they have no firm economic base nor a coherent national narrative. Whatever the short-term problems faced by the U.S., we do have an inspiring national narrative – a free, open society, democracy and rule of law. To back this up and protect our interests we also have the strongest, most competent military the world has ever witnessed and an alliance system of like-minded countries that span the globe. And we have a strong economic base with a regulated free market capitalist system that produces amazing products and wealth. Those are the sources of our strength and our great influence around the world. Until China abandons the one-party state and frees its people, it will remain a weak player on the global stage.