ABSTRACT
THE QUESTION IN CONTEXT Any nyone following debates over foreign policy in the United States since the end of the Cold War cannot help but note the lack of consensus over the nature of, rationale behind, and extent of U.S. involvement in world affairs.1 The events of September 11, 2001 briefly created an apparent consensus around the vague notion of “the war on terror”. This consensus as well, however, is beginning to be questioned. The debate centers both around the goals that American foreign policy should be pursuing, as well as around the type of cooperation strategies that the United States should choose in order to advance its goals. By cooperation strategies I mean the form the United States chooses for organizing its cooperation with regional states, both in security and economic issues, in order to deal with regional security threats or with economic problems. Can and will the United States seek to advance its interests unilaterally, as the Bush Jr. administration initially suggested? Will it adopt mainly bilateral cooperation strategies? Or will it endorse multilateral cooperation strategies, regional or global, as the Clinton administration did in the past? These questions are important not only for American policymakers, but also for America’s partners around the globe. However, before one can make policy predictions on this issue, it is necessary to understand the logic behind the choice among different cooperation strategies. Such understanding can best be gained by adopting both an analytical and a historical perspective.
