American Power Lies in the Economy

The U.S. is not looking good these days. It humiliatingly lost the bid to host the 2022 World Cup to Qatar, a small Middle Eastern country with a population of only 1.6 million people. The WikiLeaks release of 250,000 U.S. diplomatic documents continues to be reported every day. Private Bradley Manning of the U.S. military has been charged and arrested merely for the disclosure of some information. Even if counterterrorism information had been divulged, it does not merit such a harsh repercussion.

The diplomacy of the hitherto hegemonic United States, along with its military might, has maintained world order. Cooperation with the proper authorities was necessary to begin the war on terror. Quality relations and discussion require a certain level of trust between two countries. But the recent WikiLeaks incident has taken a considerable toll on foreign confidence in the United States. How are countries expected to negotiate with a counterpart that has demonstrated an inability to guard confidentiality? This sort of backlash from countries worldwide continues to be reported in the media.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has provoked this incident through meticulous calculation. In recognition of his own limitations in publicizing the documents, as well as to avoid being the sole target of inevitable backlash, Assange released the cables to five of the world’s leading newspapers, including America’s The New York Times and the U.K.’s The Guardian. By doing so, he asserted that citizens had a right to know what exactly their governments were up to. These newspapers agreed to Assange’s demands and reported on the leaked cables, knowing that at least one of the five recipients would undoubtedly do so even if the rest refused. The newspapers had already decided to release the contents of the cables despite a subsequent letter to WikiLeaks from U.S. State Department legal adviser Harold Koh that denounced its actions as a violation of the law and called for the immediate suspension of further publication.

The tarnished prestige of U.S. diplomacy and the country’s weakening economy are omens of America’s decline. Employment has deteriorated, with the number of jobless Americans reaching 15 million. It is no wonder Americans have quickly come to lose confidence. National pride in the software and information technology sectors remains intact. However, as its weaknesses in managing confidential information have been exposed, more doubts are now being cast on America’s ability to maintain its front as a world superpower.

If U.S. diplomacy is truly weakened by the recent WikiLeaks incident, more resources must be put into maintaining the world order. This follows the same logic of investing an enormous amount of funds in the war on terror after the Sept. 11 attacks.

The problem is that it is difficult for the economically vulnerable America to spend much money. The U.S. already uses $200 million per day to pay for the Afghanistan war. Many Americans believe that these funds should instead be spent on job creation. As Paul Kennedy foresaw in “The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers”, more and more people are pointing out that the U.S. will end in decline for having squandered its economic strength in attempts to bolster its political influence. Yale law professor Bruce Ackerman argued in “The Fall and Decline of the American Republic” that the expansion of an immoderate U.S. government would ultimately place the country in danger.

The U.S. must find the means to spur economic growth that can support the country’s expansion. This is the only way to prevent its decline. By observing China’s path, we can see that both military and diplomatic power ultimately stem from economic capacity. Although the U.S. is in dire need of reducing its budget deficit in both the medium and long term to fight unemployment and promote investment, its political circles are tied up in an endless debate on tax cuts for the rich. These days, it seems that America alone is caught in the tangles of its politics, economics and diplomacy.