Global Hegemony Vs. Regional Hegemony: How the Us Strategically Influences Power

СРАВНИТЕЛЬНЫЙ АНАЛИЗ КОНЦЕПЦИЙ И ИНСТИТУТОВ DOI: 10.24411/2221-3279-2020-10001 GLOBAL HEGEMONY VS. REGIONAL HEGEMONY: HOW THE US STRATEGICALLY INFLUENCES POWER Matthew Crosston American Military University, the United States of America Article history: Abstract: The article explores the controversial thesis that the United States strategically and consistently Received: maneuvers against the emergence of regional hegemons 19.07.2019 across the globe. Whether it is Russia in the former Soviet space, China across the South China Sea, the United States Accepted: works to disallow the expression of regional hegemonic 28.11.2019 power despite its own continued reliance on its global hegemony being accepted. The author goes to the heart About the author: of power positioning and exploitation in the 21st century: Professor, Program Director of Intelligence Studies; is the emergence of regional hegemons disruptive to Senior Doctoral Faculty, the global system or benefi cial? Is the United States’ Global Security and Strategic Intelligence concerns altruistic or selfi shly motivated by its own national security interests and global infl uence? Does it e-mail: [email protected] matter who is trying to wield regional infl uence? These and other questions are addressed, providing a new Key words: approach to understanding how power is being wielded hegemony; regionalism; today and for the foreseeable future. United States; foreign policy; Russia; China; power This article explores the controversial American power positioning and exploitation thesis that the United States strategically and in the 21st century. consistently maneuvers against the emergence Is the emergence of regional hegemons of regional hegemons across the globe. Whether disruptive to the global system? Are the it is Russia in the former Soviet space or China United States’ concerns about regional power across the South China Sea, the United States expressions altruistic or selfi shly motivated works to disallow the expression of regional by its own concerns about national security hegemonic power despite its own continued interests and its long-term global infl uence? reliance on its global hegemony being accepted. Does it matter who is trying to wield regional Up to now, most examinations have considered infl uence? These and other questions will be this simply an exercise of American foreign addressed, lensed through both the current policy and global positioning according to its state of thought on hegemony and real-world own best interests. What has gone largely absent empirical investigation, providing a new from this is how much our understanding of perspective on how American power today American hegemony (its structure, its theoretical is not just being utilized but projected out to underpinnings, and its ultimate purpose over other critical security regions of the world. time) can provide a better explanation not just Understanding how that projection is viewed of American positions but also the interaction (and adapted to/countered by) regional powers with major regional powers in this fi rst fi fth will provide unique insights into the medium- of the 21st century. Consequently, this article term future of systemic power and world goes to the heart of regional perceptions about order. COMPARATIVE POLITICS RUSSIA . 2020 Vol.11 No.1 5 СРАВНИТЕЛЬНЫЙ АНАЛИЗ КОНЦЕПЦИЙ И ИНСТИТУТОВ The hegemony muddles another, this work posits a perhaps controversial assertion: that they are instead two sides of the The fi rst thing this work will declare is same American power coin and have, for years, what it is not: it is not a review of the mountains regularly been interchanged, often with one of literature that offers slightly different but being used to justify and rationalize the need ever-more complex interpretations of what for the other. Those who deal with hegemony hegemony is or isn’t. For the purposes of this strictly from the theoretical perspective might work, it will suffi ce to take the relatively benign easily miss this important distinction, for its and non-controversial defi nition of hegemony most vivid expressions come not within the as a prevailing order upheld by some mixture of academy but from the real world. Some have consensual and coercive forces and that across even taken to giving it a sinister-sounding most of the literature in international affairs autonomous nickname, The Deep State. But the term ‘hegemony’ has a generally more this article rejects the notion that the Deep State 1 benefi cial connotation than the term ‘empire.’ is something running perniciously alongside This work is also not challenging the assertion regular transparent power and undermining that since the end of WWII, and certainly since its most coveted principles. Rather, it is the the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the United functional amoral center of American foreign States has occupied unquestioned hegemonic policy power and it has for a long time been dominance within the global system. That actively serving the purpose of prolonging its dominance has been material, ideational, global hegemony and preventing the emergence institutional, and structural and pursued of any other contenders on the regional level. through both the aforementioned consensual This last point is important: too often 2 and coercive actions. discussions of American hegemony are focused What is more intriguing to this project is on the plausibility of a new player emerging teasing out that consensual/coercive dynamic and taking the crown, as it were. Since that within American global hegemony, how it has has always seemed an almost insurmountable impacted the development of regional power objective, most of these discussions have around the globe, and to what ultimate purpose. rejected the idea outright. The most liberal will Some works have deftly pointed out that this say simply that American hegemony is unlikely consensual/coercive diode has quite literally to continue forever and thus will eventually created a dual state: the ever-famous democratic dissipate, but to be replaced by...something other 3 one and the less-recognized security state. The than a new global hegemonic power. I am more former is always highlighted by the United States interested in how other major powers around and touted as the reason why American power the world (China, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, should not ever be considered an empire proper, Nigeria, just to name some popular ones) have that its initiatives and actions can rightly be been met with resistance by American global seen as endeavoring to help the global common hegemony while trying to express their own good in numerous and diverse ways. The latter limited form of regional hegemony. What will is less public but increasingly more potent and be seen in this article is how that resistance is seems to be behind many global maneuvers perhaps the greatest evidence of the United that work against the ideals and principles of States doing everything it can to prevent future liberal Western traditions (think invasive mass contenders from ever emerging. American surveillance, rendition and indefi nite detention, hegemony is not resting on its laurels and it torture, and the violation of sovereignty). is not going complacently into the good night. While some like to point out these two ‘states’ It is, and has been, fi ghting tooth and nail for of hegemony as diametrically opposed to one its continued dominance on the world stage and has viewed regional hegemonic power 1 Good, A. American Exception: Hegemony and expression as a challenge of relevance that the Dissimulation of the State // Administration demands elimination. & Society, 2018, No. 50(1), pp. 4-29. 2 It is rather fascinating how the literature Ibid. has played close to this idea for quite some time 3 Ibid. 6 СРАВНИТЕЛЬНАЯ ПОЛИТИКА . 2020 Т.11 №1 СРАВНИТЕЛЬНЫЙ АНАЛИЗ КОНЦЕПЦИЙ И ИНСТИТУТОВ but yet never explicitly made the connection to institutions.6 While this is indeed laudable as the impact it had on regional power around the a goal for humanity, it is curious that we have globe. not been able to draw strategic lines between Perhaps with the focus so exclusively this project and the manner in which America focused on whether or not a singular rival could has always tried to project is global power emerge to replace the United States it made it hegemonically. If you can get others to buy less possible to see the smaller-scale but so into the idea that your power is somehow ‘good signifi cant infl uence at the lower regional level. for all,’ then anyone rising to assert their own The debate, for example, about how second-tier grander power gestures would not just be about states seemed to not necessarily seek to frustrate themselves, or even about challenging the American power but rather aligned with the US United States, but actually serving as agitators is quite telling: it was the fear of rising regional against the common global good. powers (often emphasized to the second-tier It is an interesting conception, given that states by American foreign policy positions) the US has so actively tried to suppress publicity that made alignment with the global hegemon away from its pursuit of national interests and more attractive.4 The purpose of this debate cloak/veil them instead under the guise of this was to provide evidence as to why American benevolent form of hegemony. In short, rather hegemony, despite being weaker than in decades than being two different kinds, the security past, still might endure and be longer-lasting state in America has sought to rationalize its than anyone presumed. What the debate missed own actions by convincing others it is in fact was how this was not an organic event at all working for democratic hegemonism. Indeed, but rather the purposeful strategy of the United another form of this has been how globalization States to further undermine growing regional (the supposed projection of democratic power.

Load more