ABSTRACT
As the debates continue on US foreign policy, it is useful to reflect on how the US is viewed in the world. For most of the Cold War period, American leadership of “the free world” was accepted without question. Since the end of the Cold War, the US has often been perceived as a bully, threatening to punish others if it did not get its way, or to withdraw, or not to pay its dues. Madeleine Albright may have been right in describing the US in 1996 as “the indispensable nation” but few foreigners enjoyed being lectured at by a nation that did not pay its UN dues and chose selectively what international agreements it would join. There is no question that America’s image worsened during the first nine months of the 2001 Bush administration. Many were shocked at the administration’s defiance of world opinion on a whole range of global issues. Perhaps the rejection of the Kyoto Protocol was the biggest shock. A strong argument can be made that US national interests would be better served by a more enlightened international environmental policy. By rejecting a world system based on multilateralism and compromise, many countries have come to resent and distrust American leadership. According to one European Foreign Minister, quoted by Reuters on 7 March 2002, “we are witnessing a phenomenon without precedent. We have never seen such disdain from Washington. Not only is there a complete absence of consultation, but there is an exaltation of unilateralism and the militarization of foreign policy thinking.” This resentment could be costly to America in the future. Certainly America’s size and geographical situation has made it easier to ignore those proclaiming the necessity of global interdependence. US military and economic superiority has also made many Americans reluctant to accept that there might be an alternative to doing it “my way.” But going-it-alone also carries a price.
