US Research and Policy Needs to Go Beyond “Conspiracy Theory”

Within the U.S. government, different departments and individuals hold varying points of view. They have different interests and policy objectives, and compete with each other in order to influence decision-making. Therefore, U.S. foreign policy-making is not a completely unified, rational process, but rather is made up of “various participants of the process bargaining and compromising.” Thus, “the final decision is likely to be neither rational, nor the best.” This is senior researcher of the Academy of Social Sciences Zhou Qi’s impressive view expressed in her new book “Characteristics of the Process of Foreign Policy-Making in America.” In her book on the U.S. foreign policy-making system, she talks about the center of power, the president. In her introduction, she shows that presidential power is constrained not only by the agencies within the executive branch, but also by Congress, political parties, interest groups, public opinion, and other powerful factors. Sometimes the president has to compromise, sometimes not.

Not fully understanding the “ins and outs” of U.S. foreign policy-making makes it difficult to grasp the objectives and impact of that policy. In recent times, we often see the analytical framework of a conspiracy theory in the interpretation of a series of actions in the United States. In the public’s eye, diplomatic behavior in the United States can be summarized as a conspiracy theory and has drawn criticism. But as a strategic researcher, the author believes this conclusion is too simplified.

U.S. foreign policy is characterized by power, not conspiracy. The United States has never turned down talks with world leaders. If we have underestimated or even skipped over information of the U.S.’s involvement in regional affairs, then our strategic research is not up to par. In the next few decades, the United States will remain in power which has obvious advantages, as there are a wide range of alliance relationships and partnerships to be had. I see that small countries would like to borrow the power of the United States to counterbalance China, but to believe that the United States will play a game with East Asia to cause isolation and neglect is blind optimism. America’s power policy is built on the strength of their ability to apply pressure. If the U.S. cannot keep enough pressure on others to sustain its power, then its power will “collapse onto itself.”

In short, the only real insight into the rationale of the U.S. foreign policy decision-making is that we cannot be surprised by the military lineup on our periphery. Do not read too much into each other’s diplomatic language. Do not overestimate the role and affect of discussions between the U.S. and East Asia to settle major differences. It is hard to believe that talking with the U.S. president is the only way to settle relations. I hope that whatever consensus can be made will last for 10 years or more.