Is the US in decline as a power in international politics? Why or why not?

Since the events of 11 September 2001, the international system has had to adjust to an America that is more unilateralist, more interventionist and more inclined to use military forceand, indeed, more demanding of what it expects from its allies.

Finally, Joseph Nye argues that soft power will help the US endure as the dominant state by turning its power into international consensus and US principles into international norms.223Nye, The Paradox of American Power, supra note 1, at 69. The US does have a large store of influence based on the appeal of its ideas, and the world has been moving closer to US values in the post-Cold War era, with increasingly widespread (though not universal) acceptance of democracy, human rights and liberal trading rules.24 24 On the appeal of these ideals, see M. Mandlebaum, The Ideas that Conquered the World: Peace, Democracy
and Free Markets in the 21st Century (2002).

This lack of faith in lawyers was reflected in US rejection of the Kyoto Protocol, withdrawal from negotiations on a verification protocol for the Biological Weapons Convention, its restrictive stance on the proposed Convention on Small Arms, its withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (a critical component of multilateral arms control regimes) and redoubled efforts to undermine the International Criminal Court. 52

Soft power decline due to overstepping the UN, in Iraq and in a world that is growing into multi-polar system it needs to take collective action. And also human right abuses. It unilateral action weakens its credibility. US soft power is not as readily as employed as military or economic power. Is it a relevant measure of power as conventional measures such as political and military power? US dominates in products, universities, the prevalence of the English language. 9:14 The detainment facilities in Guantanamo, the use of torture against suspected terrorists, and the widely denounced invasion of Iraq in 2003 have all tarnished the American image and put a dent in its soft power- its ability to attract others to its point of view. Talk about Guantanamo and torture The US soft power, its ability to attract others to its point of view, has reduced as a result of the US-led invasion of Iraq. The US faced widespread resistance on February 15, 2003, as it prepared an invasion to rid Iraq of its suspected weapons of mass destruction and to overthrow Saddam Husseins dictatorship. Hundreds of thousands of protestors gathered the streets of London, Madrid, Oslo, Tokyo, Paris, Rome and elsewhere rallying for the US to withhold from invasion. According to Nye, these public demonstrations marked the denial of support from electorates worldwide towards the Iraq invasion- that made it difficult for their governments to support the US military action. It is important that the US musters support from other states as they can provide the US with additional financial and political backing. The US stands to lose more time, money, and

resources to secure and rebuild Iraq without international support. The US has declined in the area of garnering international support. Without UN authorisation, the US and the United Kingdom (UK) are left with a costly bill for rebuilding Iraq. The congressional Budget Office estimates that the US has spent $368 billion on the war in Iraq, which, projected out to 2017, would top $1 trillion with $705 billion in interest repayments. By taking military action against Iraq without UN authorisation the US has weakened its credibility on the international arena add poll of declining popularitiy. Although it remains a question as to what extent American unilateralism can directly negate from it pursuing its national interest in the future. According to Lynch and Singh (who are they), the US has the option to conduct multilateral diplomacy when it can afford to but also to be unilateral when it cannot. The US has an extensive network of allies that it co-operates with at its choosing. The US overstepping of the UN in the 2003 Iraq invasion failed to recognise the importance of political exchange. This action also ignored and the significance of international organisations such as the UN for setting international legal frameworks, of which provide the founding basis for cooperation between states in combating terrorism.1 As John Ikenberry wrote before Iraq, unchecked US power, shorn of legitimacy and disentangled from post-war norms and institutions of the international order, will usher in a more hostile international system, making it far harder to achieve American interests.2 However, realists may contend that the US has little to fear from other states within the UN as it lacks a substantial enforcement mechanism. This being said, the US stands to benefit from cooperating with the UN in its fight against global poverty, security of nuclear weapons, combat against climate change and containment of terrorism.3 The US still maintains far-reaching alliances that demonstrate its political influence. As Bradley Thayer describes, there is Far from there being a backlash against the United States, there is a worldwide band wagoning with it (Layne and Thayer, 2007). Eighty four states are US allies (footnote, or reresearch). The US benefits from alliance such as that with the UK through mutual cooperation in the areas of trade, commerce, arts, science and joint military operations. As Haass observes, the brute reality remains that most countries wish to align with the US, actively do so, and benefit directly from its security guarantees, open markets and international trade. However, the question of going to war with Iraq has strained the NATO alliance. States such as France, Germany and Russia has resisted US
1
2

Johnstone, Ian. European Journal of International Law. Sep2004, Vol. 15 Issue 4, p813-838. 26p. Ikenberry, Americas Imperial Ambition, 81 Foreign Affairs (Sept./Oct. 2002) 44, 56.

Sachs, Jeffrey. Why the US Needs the UN more than ever. 2005, Columbia University Press

demands for support for what they see as a hurried resort to arms. Only the UK and Australia have openly supported US efforts during the Iraq War. According to Nye, the US cannot confront the new threat of terrorism without cooperation of other countries. Counterterrorism requires a global effort in order to provide capacity-building and training assistance in areas that the US may lack resources and coverage. It also demands international efforts to share intelligence, assist states to build their capacity to combat terrorism and engage with non-traditional allies. In order to build the trust necessary for sharing information to prevent and detect terrorist acts, the US needs to engage in multilateral bodies. The US so far has withdrawn from key documents such as the Kyoto Protocol, a verification protocol for the Biological Weapons Convention, the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty as well as redoubled efforts to undermine the International Criminal Court.4 This inhibitive stance has detracted from the US superpower status in terms of its legitimacy in international organisations by choosing to adopt its self-assumed right to remove itself from multilateral principles and practices when it matches its own interests . 5 Nye argues that soft power will help the US endure as the dominant state by turning its power into international consensus and US principles into international norms.6 The US needs to cooperate in multilateral organisations addressing global issues such as weapons proliferation to gain approval and international support. Building its soft power allows it to garner greater political influence to achieve its national interests such as security. Despite US decline in soft power due to its unilateralism during the Iraq invasion, US culture, technology and products persistently dominate the market. US brands continue to affect socio-politcal-economic wellbeing of people of the world. For instance, Facebook, Twitter and Youtube are important in demonstrations, political campaigns and social unrests. US brands continue to meet growing globalised need for mobility and communications: Apple, Microsoft, CISCO, Oracle and Boeing to name a few. However, the US image has been damaged by its distrust of multilateral institutions such as the UN. The US opts for bilateral rather than multilateral trade agreements and a military rather than policing approach to counter-terrorism.

Barresi, Paul A. Chinese Journal of International Law. Sep2011, Vol. 10 Issue 3, p609-649. 41p 5 WIRTH, TIMOTHY E. Harvard International Review. Spring2011, Vol. 33 Issue 1, p54-58. 5p.
4

Nye, The Paradox of American Power, supra note 1, at 69.