How Does the US Continue To Lead the World?

Published in Huanqiu
(China) on 19 August 2017
by Huang Yuan (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Fiona McAllister. Edited by Christine Murrison.
The international media have recently been reporting on some apparent problems in the U.S. A lack of recovery from the U.S. financial crisis has led to growing conflict within the diverse community of ethnic groups in Charlottesville, and the disturbing events in the community, as seen recently, are the result of old wounds reappearing. This is an issue that has previously been covered up by the idea of economic prosperity. Meanwhile, Trump’s administration seems to be struggling with retaining employees; the issue of a lack of personnel in important positions has not been resolved – instead, this situation only seems to be growing worse with each passing day. Added to these problems are the changing relations between the U.S. and the EU, and people are starting to question how the U.S. will continue to lead the world.

Earlier this year in July, Trump made an announcement from the White House that the U.S. was withdrawing from the Paris climate agreement, and this immediately led to intense domestic protests and international resentment.

Internationally, the Paris climate agreement is the third historic milestone in international law, and it is a continuation of the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which was followed by the 1997 Kyoto Protocol; it sets targets to control the earth’s temperature and greenhouse gas emissions, and has set out its agenda for the governance of these targets beyond the year 2020. As the result of constant discussions over the past few decades, a common understanding has been reached, and the Paris climate agreement has obtained extensive worldwide support. And yet Trump has declared that the U.S. is withdrawing from the Paris climate agreement, and it can be said that the EU and the rest of the world are forming the opinion that the U.S. is heading down the road of nationalism.

In recent debates regarding the cost of defense between the U.S., the EU, and their Asian allies, the United States' interests have been number one. The U.S. does not care about the construction of common interests in pursuing its “America First” policy and is not willing to shoulder its responsibilities as a powerful country. This means that the direction of global governance is currently highly uncertain.

Those going down the road of nationalism with Trump’s “Make America Great Again” dream may not have great doubts about America’s ability to lead the world. However, the current state of affairs runs counter to this desire. On Aug. 12 in Charlottesville, white supremacists, Ku Klux Klan members and neo-Nazis held a political protest that turned violent. Afterward, anti-racist demonstrations were held in many locations, while right-wing protesters claimed to hold nine demonstrations. On Aug. 14, in Durham, North Carolina, protesters pulled down a Confederate statue; on Aug. 15, the Lincoln Memorial in Washington was vandalized by graffiti. Everyone is becoming more divided, and people on the left and the right are becoming ever more opposed to each other.

The governmental imbalance and the political hierarchy are becoming even more critical, and are increasingly hard for the U.S. to ignore. After Word War II, the U.S. constructed a national education system, invested in advanced technology and a transnational economy, led rapid and comprehensive improvements in global militaries, focused on sovereign interventions with global strategic gains, and was very active and clear in its intentions: primarily, to establish dominance in North America; secondly, to create NATO so it could lead Europe and pull down the Soviet Union. At the beginning of this century, the global focus shifted toward Asia, and the strategy of pivoting to the Asia-Pacific sphere was created. In all respects, the U.S. was the leading figure.

However, currently, the U.S. is shrinking back from its global responsibilities and obligations – even the North American Free Trade Agreement appears to be in renegotiations. America is currently facing violence and opposition from different political groups, and growing differences in ideologies prove that the current domestic political polarization of the U.S. has reached a new level. These are not issues that can be resolved overnight. Consequently, the United States' energy and its ability to lead the world are inevitably being called into question.



黄元:美国拿什么继续领导世界

最近,在世界媒体报道的笔下,美国似乎出现一些问题。国内夏洛茨维尔的骚乱事件是美国金融危机后经济复苏乏力引发的不同群体、族裔之间的矛盾日益凸显、旧伤复发的结果,而这一问题以前被掩盖在经济繁荣表象下。与此同时,特朗普政府在用人方面出现了严重的捉襟见肘,重要岗位人员缺失的问题不但没有解决,反而日益严重。结合之前美国与欧洲关系发生的变化,人们开始质疑,美国将拿什么继续领导这个世界?
  早在今年6月,特朗普在白宫宣布退出《巴黎协定》,这一决定随即引发其国内与国际社会的强烈不满。
  从国际范围看,《巴黎协定》是在1992年《联合国气候变化框架公约》(UNFCCC)框架下继1997年《京都议定书》之后,人类历史上一致应对气候变化的第三个里程碑式的国际法律文本,为控制地球气温和温室气体排放设定系列行动目标,为2020年后的全球气候治理作出行动议程。基于几十年来不断讨论形成的共识,《巴黎协定》得到了国际社会的广泛支持。而特朗普宣布退出,可以说让欧洲和世界其他国家加深了“美国正走上本土主义道路”的判断。
  结合之前美国与欧洲、亚洲盟友之间关于防务费用开支问题的争论,美国利益第一与“美国不在乎全球共同利益建构”的价值取向暴露无遗,直接反映出奉行“美国第一”而不愿意承担大国责任。这也意味着全球治理共同价值趋向建构,充满着不确定变数的内在危机。
  如果说走上“本土主义”道路的特朗普政府真的能实现“让美国再次伟大”,人们对美国领导世界的能力恐怕不会产生太大的怀疑。但是现实情况却与这种愿望背道而驰。本月12日,在夏洛茨维尔,白人至上主义者、三K党、新纳粹主义等带有极端色彩的政治团体举行的示威活动引发了暴力。在此之后,反种族主义示威活动在多地蔓延,而右翼组织声称还要举行9场集会。14日,北卡州达勒姆市的抗议者拉倒南北战争中南方军士兵雕像;15日,首都华盛顿的林肯纪念堂遭人用油漆涂鸦破坏。一切沿着愈加分裂的方向发展,美国的左右阵营越来越多的人变得更加极端对立。
  政府失衡、阶层政党撕裂的状况愈演愈烈,令美国已经难以他顾。而二战以后,美国籍以建构国内在教育、高科技、跨国经济、全球军事和主权干预等综合实力的迅速全面提升,全球战略利益获取和话语布局十分主动、清晰。首先,确立在北美的主导地位;其次,建构北约以主导欧洲、拖垮苏联;再者,在本世纪初,全球战略重点东移,建构亚太再平衡政策。处处彰显美国在全球无处不在的主导者身影。
  但是,现在的美国在世界责任与义务面前大范围收缩,就连家门口的北美自贸协定也要重新再谈。而美国国内目前这种暴力冲突以及不同极端团体、不同主义的活跃和泛滥,说明美国国内政治极化和内斗发展到了新水平。这些问题将不是一朝一夕就能解决的。因此,美国领导世界的精力和能力受到质疑也是必然。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Australia: Donald Trump Is So Convinced of His Mandate that He Is Battling the Courts

Australia: The US’s Biggest Export? Trump’s MAGA Mindset

Cuba: The First Casualty

Austria: Trump’s Solo Dream Is Over

Topics

Hong Kong: From Harvard to West Point — The Underlying Logic of Trump’s Regulation of University Education

Spain: Trump to Students — ‘Don’t Come’

Japan: Will the Pressure on Harvard University Affect Overseas Students?

Mexico: From Star Wars to Golden Domes

Germany: US Sanctions against the EU

Austria: Whether or Not the Tariffs Are Here to Stay, the Damage Has Already Been Done*

Germany: Trump’s Tariff Policy: ‘Dealmaker’ under Pressure

Austria: Trump’s Peace Is Far Away

Related Articles

Spain: Trump to Students — ‘Don’t Come’

Japan: Will the Pressure on Harvard University Affect Overseas Students?

Germany: US Sanctions against the EU

Austria: Trump’s Solo Dream Is Over

Mexico: US Pushes for Submission