Brave Old World
Anyone interested in how the foreign policy of the Bush administration will differ from that of its predecessor should look at a pair of speeches given on January 17 by then outgoing National Security Advisor Sandy Berger and incoming Secretary of State Colin Powell. What’s most remarkable is not the disagreements over specific issues such ...
Anyone interested in how the foreign policy of the Bush administration will differ from that of its predecessor should look at a pair of speeches given on January 17 by then outgoing National Security Advisor Sandy Berger and incoming Secretary of State Colin Powell. What's most remarkable is not the disagreements over specific issues such as NATO expansion, relations with China, or peacekeeping in the Balkans. (In fact, as a close reading of these speeches suggests, the post-campaign differences on many issues are pretty picayune.) More striking is the divergence in presentation and outlook. Capping a frantic round of last-minute legacy-polishing, Sandy Berger's "A Foreign Policy for the Global Age" sets out five principles that he hopes will serve as a "touchstone" for his successors. Berger views U.S. foreign policy almost exclusively through the prism of globalization, arguing that "zero-sum increasingly must give way to win-win," championing the expansion of the "international community," characterizing Russia and China as "former great power adversaries," and calling for "expanded national security priorities."
Anyone interested in how the foreign policy of the Bush administration will differ from that of its predecessor should look at a pair of speeches given on January 17 by then outgoing National Security Advisor Sandy Berger and incoming Secretary of State Colin Powell. What’s most remarkable is not the disagreements over specific issues such as NATO expansion, relations with China, or peacekeeping in the Balkans. (In fact, as a close reading of these speeches suggests, the post-campaign differences on many issues are pretty picayune.) More striking is the divergence in presentation and outlook. Capping a frantic round of last-minute legacy-polishing, Sandy Berger’s "A Foreign Policy for the Global Age" sets out five principles that he hopes will serve as a "touchstone" for his successors. Berger views U.S. foreign policy almost exclusively through the prism of globalization, arguing that "zero-sum increasingly must give way to win-win," championing the expansion of the "international community," characterizing Russia and China as "former great power adversaries," and calling for "expanded national security priorities."
Even taking into account the differing purposes and venues of the two speeches, Powell’s confirmation testimony statement before the U.S. Senate is a stark contrast. While Powell begins with an obligatory flourish about the triumph of democracy and capitalism, he serves up the rhetorical equivalent of Cold War meat and potatoes: a stripped-down tour d’horizon from Europe to Asia and back again, with brief stops in Africa and Latin America. Powell argues that U.S. involvement in the world must be "according to our national interest and not in some haphazard way… dictated by the crisis of the day." He devotes exactly one sentence to terrorism, "environmental concerns," AIDS, and other "cross-cutting" issues.
It’s too early to tell whether Powell’s old-school statement should be seen as yet more proof that the Bush administration doesn’t appreciate how much the world has changed since many of its officeholders were last in power. But in one important respect, it is a refreshing change: Berger’s speech, with its noble closing summons to put vaccine research, education, and debt relief at "the top of the global agenda," is a reminder of the last administration’s tendency to make everything, and therefore nothing, a priority. Live as we may in a globalized world, perhaps it may not be a bad thing for U.S. foreign policy to come down to earth.
More from Foreign Policy
Can Russia Get Used to Being China’s Little Brother?
The power dynamic between Beijing and Moscow has switched dramatically.
Xi and Putin Have the Most Consequential Undeclared Alliance in the World
It’s become more important than Washington’s official alliances today.
It’s a New Great Game. Again.
Across Central Asia, Russia’s brand is tainted by Ukraine, China’s got challenges, and Washington senses another opening.
Iraqi Kurdistan’s House of Cards Is Collapsing
The region once seemed a bright spot in the disorder unleashed by U.S. regime change. Today, things look bleak.
Sign up for Morning Brief
Foreign Policy’s flagship daily newsletter with what’s coming up around the world today. Delivered weekdays.
By submitting your email, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use and to receive email correspondence from us. You may opt out at any time.
