A National Strategic Narrative Analysis

A) The title of the book is The New American Militarism: How Americans are Seduced by War and the author is Andrew Bacevich. The book was published in New York, New York by the publisher Oxford University Press in the year 2005. It is the first edition and contains 270 pages.

in the region. America’s presence in Guam and the Philippines and its support of China posed

As every day passes China grows stronger in every aspect and eventually they will be knocking on America’s doorstep in each of those categories. Economically, China is closing rapidly, but even the sleeping giant as Napoleon Bonaparte called it, has its limits. To be blunt, China is resource hungry and who knows what their country will do next. With the level of nationalism that their people have, China could go in multiple directions. For example, let us look at both China attempting to exert control over the South China Sea and also with the Senkaku Islands. Both of these areas are becoming more and more hostile, which ultimately could lead to deadly military engagements. With that being said, Blij also proposes an argument that I have been pondering for a while and that is a potential cold war between the U.S.A. and China. On the outside it seems as if there is a potential collision course to that conclusion. However, Blij does offer an interesting solution to this possibility and it is one that I believe should be the strongest takeaway. Blij suggests that trade, scientific, cultural and educational links and exchanges can be the solution to this issue. After all, China is responsible for many of the essential aspects to our life. Therefore, the least we as Americans can do is learn the various geographical aspects that encircle

America is an improbable idea, a mongrel nation built of ever-changing disparate parts, itis held together by a notion, the notion that all men are created equal, though everyone knows that most men consider themselves better than someone. "Of all the nations in the world, the United States was built in nobody's image," the historian Daniel Boorst in wrote. That's because it was built of bits and pieces that seem discordant, like the crazy quilts that have been one of its great folk-art forms, velvet and calico and checks and brocades. Out of many, one. That is the ideal.The reality is often quite different, a great national striving consisting frequently of failure. Many of the oft-told stories of the most pluralistic nation on earth are stories

When comparing and contrasting among history, literature, psychology, in terms of the central concern, values, approaches, and the connection they share with the community, one will find the transformations of the culture in war amazing. Throughout the test of time, the central concern has always been having power for the US. History shows that winning wars, being a power house, a leader, is about domination. The mentality is to win, allowing for authority. The values of the culture in war have transformed. One of the values was in the soldiers’ fight not life. With time, the human life of the troop gained significance. As people of the country gained financial security, they no longer wanted to be obligated to military affairs, allowing for a militarism that meant no forcing of war, but instead financing troops. The change in “revolutionary technologies” has also given way to a more futuristic approach when handling military affairs. The advancements has made it so that war is no longer a must, or a fight for survival, but a business that as lead to power. The text explains the American people are no longer involved as once before, instead they have detached from affairs of the

Following the War of 1812, the United States established itself as a world power and proved its capability to protect needy nations. After the French Revolution, nations realized the importance of balancing power and recognized the dangerousness of one nation holding excessive power. (Stanley Chodorow, MacGregor Knox, Conrad Schirokauer, Joseph Strayer, Hans Gatzke 1969) For years, America held the policy of isolationism and only intervened in other countries’ affairs if necessary. Despite strained relations in the past, diplomatic relations with China began in 1979. (Andrew J. Nathan, Columbia University 2009) Last year, an American battleship entered the South China Sea, inspecting Chinese activities. As an ally and nation known to keep the

America, the brave and the strong; when many think of America, these are the things that come to mind. Of course they would think about all the good and prosperous things such as; a rather large and strong military, the outstanding amount of charities, and some of the most powerful and great leaders to go down in history. How couldn’t they? Although there are all sorts of great aspects there are also many down falls to America. America has a huge amount of debt as a whole, some major rough spots in the economy, and a large problem with crimes that deal with shooters.

Realism is one of the most dominant international relations theories in the academic world. But within Realism, Realists are split on a number of issues. A perfect example of which being the rise of China. Over the past 30 years China has increased not only in population and power, but has also achieved one of the strongest economies in the world. The rise of China is seen as problematic by many realists. Since the end of the Cold War and the fall of the Soviet Union, the US has enjoyed a position of hegemony in the unipolar power structure of the world. Many fear that the rise of China could upset the current balance of power. One such individual is a prominent realist scholar, John Mearsheimer. He believes that war with China is inevitable and “calls for the US to do whatever it can to slow China’s rise.” Another political theorist Jonathan Kirshner wrote this paper to counter many of Mearsheimer’s claims, stating that Mearsheimer’s offensive realism “is wrong, and dangerous”. Kirshner suggests that instead of using offensive realism we should look instead to the theories roots in classical realism to analyse the rise of China.

As I understand the historical connection between China and United States, they were and in some sense still are both rivals, which began with Mao Zedong driving American-supported Chang out of China soon after the unconditional surrender of the defeat of aggressive Imperial Japan in 1945. Mao took over China and forced Chang to beat a hasty retreat to Taiwan Island. Then in l950, the world witnessed the fierce armed confrontation between Mao led China versus the United Nations' forces with the full backing of United States during the three year Korean War which eventually became a stalemate to this day. Then there was another world-shattering war between U.S. and Communist Soviet-China over the devastating Vietnam. So China had been at

Since the fall of the Soviet Union, the Cold War was over, making the U.S. the only superpower left in the world. This has made the international system much more tranquil, and relaxed. The only country potentially powerful besides the U.S., is China. Many Americans fear China, not only because they are communist, but also because of their huge population. Their population is 1.3 billion people, which accounts 1/5th of the world’s population. As one of the only potential superpowers in the world, it would be in the best interest of all Americans if the U.S. and China became allies, instead of enemies. Peace and development, economic prosperity and social progress, are goals that both of

The current international system is fragmenting rapidly since the end of the Cold War. A lot of regions in the world are still trying to find the balance of power in the international system, which the U.S. often intervenes to provide its brand of “global leadership”. Some countries like China are emerging as a global power since a few years ago. Subsequently, this will lead to a major threat to the U.S. status as a global major power. The rise of power by China in the international scene signifies the unpredictable nature of the international system. I would argue that the three most critical challenges for the U.S. arising out of this environment are the future world globalization that will cause a conflict between its domestic and foreign policy, the rise of China as a global power, and the ever globalization of terrorism. I believe that the U.S. should be pragmatic in handling its foreign policy and handle each situation independently without a fix doctrine in order to minimize the unintended consequences produced by the globalization of the world.

The events that have taken place over the past couple of centuries, and more so the past decade, have monumentally impacted the relationship between the United States and China for better and for worse. Today, China and the U.S. have evolved into two of the most elite superpowers in the world, and they classify as some of the most prominent leaders in economics, military, technology, and universal innovation. Currently, the United States is just weeks away from electing their next president, cyber-attacks are being investigated exponentially, and the South China Sea Debate continues to be disputed. The outcomes of all these events will undoubtedly affect the relationship between China and the United States for the next 10 years.

The People’s Republic of China (PRC) has become more integrated and willing to cooperate within the global political and economic systems than ever in its history. However, there is growing apprehension in the Asia-Pacific region and the U.S. in regards to the consequences of rising in economic and military power in China. Descriptions about Chinese diplomacy in the policy and scholarly are less positive lately concerning China’s obedience to regional and international rules. There was little debate in the U.S. and elsewhere in regards to whether China was or was not part “the international community.” Scholars and experts in the early 1990s have contended

Realism assumes that under a balance of power, the overriding aim of all states is to maximize power and become the only hegemony in the system. States only help themselves in the anarchic international system. Therefore, China’s rise is regarded as a disconcerting threat to the U.S.’s primacy of power in the present international stage. The power shift in East Asia is creating security dilemmas; the U.S. thus demands more security to its Asian allies including Philippines, Japan and South Korea. The rapidly-rising Chinese power would inevitably challenge the current international balance of power and appear aggressively in the eyes of weaker power such as the Philippines. Therefore it seeks help to its ally, the U.S., to counterbalance the power of China. China intends to gain more resources and to transform current international order to its favor according to its national interests. The 2010 Chinese White Paper on National Defence states that: “Contradictions continue to surface between developed and developing countries and between traditional

Snyder claims that realism failed to predict the Cold War. Given this, Mearsheimer states “China cannot rise peacefully.” Since realists describe the world as a self-help system, according to Posen, every country “must look to its own interests relative to those of others” and because “security is the preeminent issue in an anarchic world, the distribution of capabilities to attack and defend should matter.” Thus, because China’s strive for regional hegemony inevitably threatens the power dynamic of the global system, the U.S. will, according to Mearsheimer, take an offensive realist approach that will eventually lead to war. In addition, as seen in post-Cold War, economic stability greatly determines the distribution of power. Friedberg notes, that the projected “speed and magnitude of China’s growth in recent decades appears to be unprecedented” and as early as 2015, “China’s economy could overtake that of the United States.” Although the U.S. faces an unprecedented challenge to economic power, according to Ikenberry, China has signaled cooperation by “redoubling its participation in existing institutions, such as the ASEAN Regional Forum and the East Asia Summit or working with the other great powers in the region to build new ones.” Nevertheless, following the actions of the U.S. post WWII, China strategically makes “itself more predictable and approachable” to reduce “the incentives for other