Mr. President,
As you take the oath returning you to the head of our government, the world looks to you for leadership in a new era.
Perhaps no leader has faced the same number—and sheer global scale—of critical issues as what crosses the president’s desk today. The United States, despite slipping somewhat from its position of undisputed superpower, it still a vital leader in a new, complicated multipolar world. As such, with strategic planning, the U.S. still has a role to play.
The problems we face today, both domestic and international, stem from the challenges of a transitioning global environment. This began slowly after the fall of the Soviet Union 21 years ago. The transition into the post-industrial, post-Cold War world began to speed up with the commercialization of the internet and the implementation of NAFTA, reached full stride with high profile terror attacks opening the Millennium, and has not slowed down since. Today, we are plagued by a clash of traditional geopolitics and the failings of the Westphalian system; of industrial era economic models and burgeoning new models brought about by technological advances.
Take, for instance, the simple issue of sales taxes, which once easily implemented, have become more difficult than ever to collect with increasing internet commerce, and without tax reform, will create ever-more problems for government budgets.
This budget problem extends into military and security issues—no longer is it practical to have a large standing army, when the adventures of the past decade have shown smaller teams of highly trained forces to be more useful in modern conflicts than an influx of ground forces.
Meantime, our economy is largely unprepared for a shift out of the industrial era. Unemployment remains high as jobs are phased out or shipped overseas, yet retraining programs cannot gain traction. Youth unemployment, stubbornly stuck in the double digits while overall unemployment drops, will remain a worsening problem. According to Cathy N. Davidson, co-director of the annual MacArthur Foundation Digital Media and Learning Competition, a full 65 percent of the children entering elementary school today will end up working jobs that have not even been invented yet.
Alongside the challenges to the global reach of our economic and military power are challenges to our cultural influences. During the Arab Spring, we saw fast food chains across the Middle East burned, targeted for being a symbol of a nation that too often sided with the oppressive leaders the people were tossing to the curb. The recent United Nations General Assembly vote on the issue of Palestine’s status was perhaps the most poignant example, as the vote of 138 to 9 (with 41 nations abstaining) in favor of recognizing Palestine as a non-member observer state shows that global public opinion is moving forward, with or without the United States. We risk being left behind in a world ready to move on with history.
How are we to address such a multitude of complicated issues? It is more important than ever that we keep channels of communication open and engage in meaningful dialogue, with both our allies and our enemies. We can be assured that the citizens of other governments—with which the U.S. officially has poor to no relations—are reaching out and connecting with American citizens over social media networks. As each side begins to see that not only is the other side of the fence not a nuclear wasteland, but might actually have some rather green grass, the disconnect between public opinion and government policy will grow.
We have already seen the power of these connections. One man’s final protest in Tunisia lit a fire across the Middle East—a fire that still engulfs Syria and Bahrain, but smolders slowly in Saudi Arabia and Jordan, waiting for a puff of air. We have seen American citizens seek to take ownership of their country’s foreign policy by making Joseph Kony famous, by leaving their homes to fight alongside rebels in Libya and Syria, or by traveling to Pakistan to draw attention to the human consequences of drone strikes.
It is no surprise that the second decade of the 21st century has proven itself the age of protests. Governments too inflexible to deal with the demands of a new era have fallen one by one, only to be replaced by a highly vulnerable vacuum. It is in no one’s best interest for governments to fall violently. As global citizens become increasingly empowered, however, it may become all too common for a government unwilling to let go some of its traditional rigidity to find itself in such a situation.
The United States must find a way to harness the energy and power of an empowered citizenry, and from it create new models of governance that can be shared around the world. While the system to petition the White House has resulted in tragicomic situations, such as every state in the union petitioning to secede, it is a solid start in creating a framework that brings the voice of the people directly to the seat of power.
Foreign policy may perhaps be the most difficult area in which to build these models for real-time interaction. Traditionally, it is an area which many—if not most—Americans are uninformed about the consequences of international policy-making. For the moment, it is possible to argue that we have the luxury of distance to cushion us. Yes, the cushion is less plush, as 9/11 and 7/7 dispelled any notion that the destruction playing across our televisions were things that happened “somewhere else.” Yet we are still somewhat spared, thanks to other barriers such as language, religion, or economic development. However, the day is coming when those will also fall, and a drone strike or IED explosion in northwest Pakistan will feel as immediate and raw to us as a man drawing a rifle on elementary-aged children.
We must be ready for that day, and for the reactions it will evoke from a global citizenry. We must learn a flexibility—through partnerships that reach across all sectors—that enables us to respond to any surprise. We must acquire a sense of introspection that moves us to consider the implications of policy beyond that traditional geopolitics concept of “national self interest.”
It is altogether possible that the next four years of foreign policy challenges will hinge primarily on traditional, industrial-era models. But that possibility grows smaller with every new mobile phone sold, with every new conversation held through social media, with every person overcoming illiteracy. The technology age is the age of the individual empowered. If we can harness the energy of that empowerment now, not only will we be saved from having to react defensively with old, rigid models later, we will gain a huge advantage—in the age of the individual empowered, we can be the nation that is led by the global citizen.
Photo by Official White House photographer Pete Souza.
This article was originally published in the Diplomatic Courier's January/February 2013 print edition.
a global affairs media network
The Next Four Years…And Beyond
January 13, 2013
Mr. President,
As you take the oath returning you to the head of our government, the world looks to you for leadership in a new era.
Perhaps no leader has faced the same number—and sheer global scale—of critical issues as what crosses the president’s desk today. The United States, despite slipping somewhat from its position of undisputed superpower, it still a vital leader in a new, complicated multipolar world. As such, with strategic planning, the U.S. still has a role to play.
The problems we face today, both domestic and international, stem from the challenges of a transitioning global environment. This began slowly after the fall of the Soviet Union 21 years ago. The transition into the post-industrial, post-Cold War world began to speed up with the commercialization of the internet and the implementation of NAFTA, reached full stride with high profile terror attacks opening the Millennium, and has not slowed down since. Today, we are plagued by a clash of traditional geopolitics and the failings of the Westphalian system; of industrial era economic models and burgeoning new models brought about by technological advances.
Take, for instance, the simple issue of sales taxes, which once easily implemented, have become more difficult than ever to collect with increasing internet commerce, and without tax reform, will create ever-more problems for government budgets.
This budget problem extends into military and security issues—no longer is it practical to have a large standing army, when the adventures of the past decade have shown smaller teams of highly trained forces to be more useful in modern conflicts than an influx of ground forces.
Meantime, our economy is largely unprepared for a shift out of the industrial era. Unemployment remains high as jobs are phased out or shipped overseas, yet retraining programs cannot gain traction. Youth unemployment, stubbornly stuck in the double digits while overall unemployment drops, will remain a worsening problem. According to Cathy N. Davidson, co-director of the annual MacArthur Foundation Digital Media and Learning Competition, a full 65 percent of the children entering elementary school today will end up working jobs that have not even been invented yet.
Alongside the challenges to the global reach of our economic and military power are challenges to our cultural influences. During the Arab Spring, we saw fast food chains across the Middle East burned, targeted for being a symbol of a nation that too often sided with the oppressive leaders the people were tossing to the curb. The recent United Nations General Assembly vote on the issue of Palestine’s status was perhaps the most poignant example, as the vote of 138 to 9 (with 41 nations abstaining) in favor of recognizing Palestine as a non-member observer state shows that global public opinion is moving forward, with or without the United States. We risk being left behind in a world ready to move on with history.
How are we to address such a multitude of complicated issues? It is more important than ever that we keep channels of communication open and engage in meaningful dialogue, with both our allies and our enemies. We can be assured that the citizens of other governments—with which the U.S. officially has poor to no relations—are reaching out and connecting with American citizens over social media networks. As each side begins to see that not only is the other side of the fence not a nuclear wasteland, but might actually have some rather green grass, the disconnect between public opinion and government policy will grow.
We have already seen the power of these connections. One man’s final protest in Tunisia lit a fire across the Middle East—a fire that still engulfs Syria and Bahrain, but smolders slowly in Saudi Arabia and Jordan, waiting for a puff of air. We have seen American citizens seek to take ownership of their country’s foreign policy by making Joseph Kony famous, by leaving their homes to fight alongside rebels in Libya and Syria, or by traveling to Pakistan to draw attention to the human consequences of drone strikes.
It is no surprise that the second decade of the 21st century has proven itself the age of protests. Governments too inflexible to deal with the demands of a new era have fallen one by one, only to be replaced by a highly vulnerable vacuum. It is in no one’s best interest for governments to fall violently. As global citizens become increasingly empowered, however, it may become all too common for a government unwilling to let go some of its traditional rigidity to find itself in such a situation.
The United States must find a way to harness the energy and power of an empowered citizenry, and from it create new models of governance that can be shared around the world. While the system to petition the White House has resulted in tragicomic situations, such as every state in the union petitioning to secede, it is a solid start in creating a framework that brings the voice of the people directly to the seat of power.
Foreign policy may perhaps be the most difficult area in which to build these models for real-time interaction. Traditionally, it is an area which many—if not most—Americans are uninformed about the consequences of international policy-making. For the moment, it is possible to argue that we have the luxury of distance to cushion us. Yes, the cushion is less plush, as 9/11 and 7/7 dispelled any notion that the destruction playing across our televisions were things that happened “somewhere else.” Yet we are still somewhat spared, thanks to other barriers such as language, religion, or economic development. However, the day is coming when those will also fall, and a drone strike or IED explosion in northwest Pakistan will feel as immediate and raw to us as a man drawing a rifle on elementary-aged children.
We must be ready for that day, and for the reactions it will evoke from a global citizenry. We must learn a flexibility—through partnerships that reach across all sectors—that enables us to respond to any surprise. We must acquire a sense of introspection that moves us to consider the implications of policy beyond that traditional geopolitics concept of “national self interest.”
It is altogether possible that the next four years of foreign policy challenges will hinge primarily on traditional, industrial-era models. But that possibility grows smaller with every new mobile phone sold, with every new conversation held through social media, with every person overcoming illiteracy. The technology age is the age of the individual empowered. If we can harness the energy of that empowerment now, not only will we be saved from having to react defensively with old, rigid models later, we will gain a huge advantage—in the age of the individual empowered, we can be the nation that is led by the global citizen.
Photo by Official White House photographer Pete Souza.
This article was originally published in the Diplomatic Courier's January/February 2013 print edition.
