The spectacle of attention-seeking drama queens that our presidential elections have become—one participant in particular having more than his share of the blame for this—continues to make the United States look like an unreliable friend on the international stage. Politico magazine* ran an article recently that described foreigners’ nervousness at the state of American politics with regard to foreign relations. Correspondent Nahal Toosi spoke with past and present diplomats to the U.S., some anonymously, about their concerns when it comes to an indispensable ally who has let his domestic political ructions come between himself and his closest friends and admirers.
Some notable cites from the article:
The U.S. is a “fat buffalo trying to take a nap” as hungry wolves approach, the [anonymous European ambassador] mused. “I can hear those Champagne bottle corks popping in Moscow — like it’s Christmas every f****ing day.”
And, in view of so many developing countries in Africa and Latin America getting friendlier with the authoritarian axis powers like China, Russia, and Iran:
“Foreign relations is very much based on trust, and when you know that the person that is in front of you may not be there or might be followed by somebody that feels exactly the opposite way, what is your incentive to do long-term deals?” a former Latin American diplomat asked.
The bad guys are offering better protection deals for those countries’ weak governments than the United States does with its unrestrained partisan contrarianism as its main guiding philosophy.
“It is right that countries debate their foreign policy stances, but if all foreign policy issues become domestic political theater, it becomes increasingly challenging for America to effectively play its global role on issues that need long-term commitment and U.S. political capital — such as climate change, Chinese authoritarianism, peace in the Middle East and containing Russian gangsterism,” a third European diplomat warned.**
This was the most helpful quote. What American foreign policy needs is a new bipartisan consensus about what values U.S. diplomacy stands for, what principles it means to promote. Since the end of the Cold War, our attitude has continued to degenerate to wanting to leave the international scene altogether, to withdraw and retreat into the North American peace kingdom separated from the troubled world by vast oceans. That might have been a viable approach in the 19th Century—but today, in the post-Space Age, high-tech world of unrestricted immediate communications, it is hardly realistic.
___
* The linked Politico article was a recommendation from The Morning Dispatch newsletter last week.
___
** Usage complaint: Why “warned”? “Said” would have been entirely sufficient. Or for variety, maybe “mused,” “noted,” “suggested.” A warning sounds too much like scolding, which does less to change minds than to annoy those who disagree with you already.
"unrestrained partisan contrarianism" Yep, that's us.
My husband is cutting back at work by taking a week off every month. This is his first week. He’s an early bird so he got up with the dogs and I can lounge in bed. It’s the little things!