Today, C-span re-aired a program held earlier this year that brought together a number of major players of the Clinton administration to discuss Clinton's Presidency. A Columbia law professor who served as an ambassador to Spain (as well as other diplomatic/state duties) spoke about the administration's approach to foreign policy and how it differs from Bush's approach. The major difference, he says is the view of unilateralism and multilateralism. Clinton, he said believed that multilateralism was critical; it was an approach that was always used when possible while unilateral resloves were used only when necessary. The Bush administration has reversed that trend, using unilateralism when possible and multilateralism only when necessary.
I am by no means a scholar (even remotely) in American diplomacy or foreign policy but common sense dictates, espeically in this day and age where the way of life of people everywhere is governed by the strings of globalization, that multilateralism as an ideology is embranced and put into practice.
Unilateralism first reared its head during the country's founding when isolationists believed it was best that the United States remained independent of European affairs which, at that time, usually involved wars and the treat of wars. In this day and age however, isolationism and unilateralism has little place in American foreign policy because everything - economies, cultures etc - have become way too fluid. It's 2005, not 1775. We cannot disassociate ourselves with the rest of world and run to the woodlands in our backyard for our basic necessities. Even oil, the black gold that runs our country has to be imported from other places.
Now, I would look forward to interesting comments and arguments in favour of unilateralism but since no one reads this piece of shit, I guess I'll go watch Golden Girls and pretend not to like it.
6:04
I am by no means a scholar (even remotely) in American diplomacy or foreign policy but common sense dictates, espeically in this day and age where the way of life of people everywhere is governed by the strings of globalization, that multilateralism as an ideology is embranced and put into practice.
Unilateralism first reared its head during the country's founding when isolationists believed it was best that the United States remained independent of European affairs which, at that time, usually involved wars and the treat of wars. In this day and age however, isolationism and unilateralism has little place in American foreign policy because everything - economies, cultures etc - have become way too fluid. It's 2005, not 1775. We cannot disassociate ourselves with the rest of world and run to the woodlands in our backyard for our basic necessities. Even oil, the black gold that runs our country has to be imported from other places.
Now, I would look forward to interesting comments and arguments in favour of unilateralism but since no one reads this piece of shit, I guess I'll go watch Golden Girls and pretend not to like it.
6:04
posted by urban prowler @ 2:50 PM
16 comments
