Can US stay at global supremacy?

2012-11-09 03:32:53 GMT2012-11-09 11:32:53(Beijing Time)

By Li Hongmei, Special to Sina English

The U.S. turned a new leaf on November. 6 when Barack Obama successfully secured his second term. Political analysts all over the world have been trying to formulate major guidelines of the US foreign policy for the next four years. On the whole, Obama is deemed more beneficial for the world community than the rival Romney.

The choice of the American people in favor of Democratic Obama suggests a move in the direction of a new world order - the so-called World of Big Zero - in which not a single country is strong enough to gain supremacy and in which every nation is strong enough to stop others from having their own way.

Obama is likely to refrain from resorting to tough methods and using force in restoring a unipolar world. The successor to the outgoing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is expected to play a significant role in the US foreign policy over the next four years.

The heatedly hyped candidates for secretary of state are respectively Democratic Senator John Kerry and US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice. John Kerry ran for president from the Democratic Party in the 2004 elections but lost to George W. Bush. After the US invasion of Iraq, liberal-minded Kerry lashed at George W. Bush saying that the US president’s addresses to the nation ought to contain at least some truth.

Susan Rice has a somewhat controversial reputation. While insisting on international intervention in Libya, she accused Muammar Gaddafi of distributing Viagra pills among his soldiers so that they would find it easier to rape women. Ms. Rice’s stance is deemed too aggressive for the contemporary world that needs subtle diplomacy, or “smart power” as Hillary Clinton has oft-sung in her term.

Besides the so-called region of U.S. “strategic interests” as Asia-Pacific, there is one more thing that makes it significant for Obama’s new term: Arab nations, namely, what kind of policy the United States will pursue in the Middle East.

However, Lebanese Minister of Transport and Public Works Ghazi Aridi has kept skeptical about Obama's Mideast policy:

“Obama’s first four-year term saw no progress towards ending the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, “what’s more, we witnessed the on-going Israeli occupation of West Bank and East Jerusalem,” he said. He is skeptical about any changes in Obama’s Middle East course.

In the meantime, Obama is also pinned hope on in the sphere that he could and would influence his allies in NATO and settle the Syrian crisis. The same holds true for the Gulf countries that political course in these countries depends on stability in the Middle East, which also serves the U.S. interests.

All this might have delivered a hidden message in his first term that If Washington wants to impose democracy in any country, this should happen peacefully.


Editor: Mei Jingya
Add Comment
Please read our Terms of Service. Messages that harass, abuse or threaten others; have obscene or otherwise objectionable content; have spam, commercial or advertising content or links may be removed.