Written by: Elias Osvald, Lizeth García Peñaflores, Laura Sofía Hernández Rodríguez and Alejandra Montes González
Dr. Van Evera argues that large states do not, in modern times, pose a threat towards the United States of America. New threats are instead the spread of weapons of mass destruction, terror, and climate change. These are global commons, i.e. they can only be dealt with on a global and collaborative level. Regarding weapons of mass destruction, they can be seen as defensive rather than offensive weapons. Wars will not break out between states with nuclear weapons when they are so destructive. Also, the way of procedure must change, it is not just about action or war, it is about considering the other party, listening to what they have to say and do and then negotiate by talking about commitments of long term and persuasion of behavior.
Nonetheless, Van Evera does emphasize the threat of science developing the power to destroy rather than the power to counteract the power to destroy. Terrorism, he argues, has been spurred by a resurgence of millenarianism across all five world religions. In other words, the belief that humanity is about to end. And, to a certain degree, Van Evera acknowledges this belief by stressing the great threat of climate change, which should be a foreign threat. Hence, the geopolitical actors today are not strong military superpowers. Instead, the actors are nature (climate), religious groups (terrorism), and science (new weapons of mass destruction). These kinds of problems need to be dealt with transnational agreements, by this we mean international cooperation.
He recommends the United States to engage in a concert of cooperation together with all major powers, in order to solve the conflicts stated above. This, he argues, is both required and enabled by the nuclear revolution. States’ fear for each other has declines, causing the, to cooperate with each other more because they pose less threat of conquest to each other.
Moreover, the United States should be “the cop on the block”, hindering conflicts between major powers and making sure that the miracle of Europe, i.e. the peacemaking after the war, is replicated everywhere. This can be viewed as a Bismarckian behavior. The chancellor feared that a war would disrupt his recently unified nation, hence, he focused creating defense coalitions. Van Evera is of the opinion that both the Bush and Obama administration have treated Russia and China as competitors and potential enemies, rather than superpowers that have common interests.
Additionally, the United States should build global legitimacy. In that same manner, they should build capacities for diplomacy. Today, American diplomacy is militarized, the Defense Department is the primary agency for foreign relations. This state of affairs should be substituted with public diplomacy, a focus on non-military diplomacy. The United States should be capable of becoming a leader state with the capacity of mediation and persuasion within the global agenda. As well as pursuing a major cooperation or coalition that allows the United States to solve specific foreign policy problems. In sum, these factors should create the possibility of building a concert.
Comments