The Emerging World: American Opportunity: Part 3

Rules of the Road for American participation in the development of the Emerging World: Point #2: Fair dispersal and stable growth of development and it's residual dividends.

Increases in economic growth and stable improvements in the standard of living have historically proven to be a key component in the liberalizing and democratizing of closed societies. As a consequence, America's key strategic initiative for the developing world, should be to work on an economic development road map with every country in the developing world. 

In partnership with the UN, the IMF, the World Bank, the WTO, the G20, assorted international agencies, and the developing societies/nation states of our planet, we can create a customized, modernized, multi-generational blueprint for every developing country. Only then can we begin fostering the economic growth and resource stabilization necessary to insure global stability. This program should include sustainable manufacturing, product and economic cycles consistent with a balanced, self sustaining free enterprise environment. Critical immediate improvements need to occur in the developing world in regards to infrastructure, food and medical aide packages, education, and resource allocations. The resources components are particularly significant, due to the fact that, many developing countries are resource rich but their governance is totally dominated by these resources, and therefore their potential and necessary economic infrastructures are completely under-developed. The boon of resource richness has largely proven to be the bane of good governance, and we need to help countries break that cycle.

The creation of free standing, vibrant, largely self sufficient economic systems, coupled with solid state infrastructures are the single best path to perpetuating and growing local and regional economies. Our international legacy as a nation should be our sustainable contribution to producing viable collective prosperity and security in the developing world. Creating economic growth and sustainability, is the first step toward securing the long term judicial, governance, media and lasting societal reform process, and is essential for the creation of stable nation states that function successfully, observe international human rights conventions, and other international codes of conduct. America needs specifically to not force democracy on nations that are largely unprepared for it. This is an obvious departure from our current stated objectives, which we attempt to execute throughout the world by force, bullying, or proselytizing our way of living on others. 

We need to acknowledge that if the citizens of a nation, struggling to survive, can not meet the most basic considerations of development: even the most basic 1st level of the survival pyramid needs, democracy is untenable and will devolve into something more sinister.

Once we acknowledge that fostering economic development is the key to success abroad, and we are seen as actively participating in generating that development, we will achieve considerably more traction on our other goals for governance, jurisprudence etc.

Further, greater economic development involvement, as an entry point into the diplomatic process will prove insufficient long term, unless we work diligently to insure that the gains of that development are not consolidated into the hands a few. Creating economic development structures and strategies that achieve balanced and widely dispersed, well seeded gains throughout these societies is critical. 

Once these massive undertakings of diplomacy and economic strategy are processed and implementation is begun, we will have the good will and collateral available to assist with societal reforms. Contrary to the opinions of some noted politicos, this approach does not compromise our values, it does produce positive results and it needs to be our core strategy for addressing the needs of over three billion fellow global citizens who need our leadership. And, when taking the long view it is obvious that our future depends on this idea as much as theirs does.

The Emerging World: American Opportunity: Part 1

The "rubber meets the road" in American Foreign Policy, as it relates to the developing world, with our efforts in matriculating the creation of new economic opportunities abroad. 

With over three billion people, or roughly half of the world's population, struggling for economic improvements that will lead them out of poverty, and over one billion people barely surviving on less than $1 a day, the developing world needs a cohesive economic strategy. Further, this over-reigning strategy can not be a one size fits all program, but rather an accumulation of tailored mechanisms for each culture, country, and society, that adheres to some core principals.

These principals, or rules of the road, are primarily four fold: 

1). environmental sustainability, cradle to cradle product cycles, and global energy program stability,

2). fair dispersal and stable growth of development, and it's residual dividends,

3). global education access and advanced development of education reforms,

4). greater global development of the aide infrastructure necessary to effectively deploy basic vaccinations, medical care, and safe drinking water.

Successive posts will address these four points individually.

Sovereignty: Liberal Democracies and the Emerging World: Part 1

Before addressing the challenges with the architectural erosion of Constitutional Liberalism in America (and the shortcomings of our Democracy generally), here is a brief note on how we are presently implementing our foreign policy.

Specifically, America has done an unsatisfactory job of establishing an over reigning foreign policy platform. We should have a "long view" diplomacy and security vision. 

That is to say, a platform that is multi-generational (4-5), informed and cohesive in addressing the security, governance, and economic challenges of today's global citizens as it relates to America and in the context of a broader global vision for the future of human society with America key-stoned as a central player. 

That is not to say that America can be short sighted and singularly pursue it's interests abroad. Quite the contrary, SP is advocating a complete refutation of the NeoCon doctrine of preemption that so dominated our foreign policy production in America for most of the last decade. Plainly stated, American sovereignty is not an exclusively acceptable justification for American preemption.

The idea that America should be prepared to take on preemptive military action, anywhere in the globe, at the slightest provocation, and whenever necessary, to protect it's interests, is absurd.  Also the idea which suggests that because America is the lone remaining super-power (really?), and because it is a "shining city on a hill" that needs to protect itself from "evil-doers" (who want to destroy our freedom? seriously?), we should radically try to remake the world governments into American friendly democracies through aggressive diplomacy (and military means?), is also fantastically ridiculous.  

The implementation and pursuit of the NeoCon doctrine of preemption (which is actually more complex that was just represented), has exclusively led to the short term expenditure of international political capital for virtually no appreciable gains, and even severe diplomatic setbacks. It has achieved these setbacks at the expense of American lives, domestic turmoil, vast opportunity costs, and international repudiation of our conduct.

America's international challenges are largely rooted in our inability to listen, and to lead through soft power, as the failure of the NeoCon doctrine demonstrates. America's chief international short coming, (which can not be overcome with throw away dictators/politicos, force of arms, etc.) is that it doesn't understand how to deal with non- liberal democracies. Whether it's oligarchs, theocracies, illiberal democracies, dictators, Maoists, or anything in between, America constantly proselytizes it's way of living and governance to audiences that are unwilling or are unprepared for the message.