Although Classical Realism and Machiavelli do not require indifference to political ideals and moral principles, but they condone hypocrisy and double standards when dealing with domestic and foreign policy issues. Machiavelli attempts to rationalize this hypocrisy by calling it a distinction between what’s desirable and what’s possible, or as Lincoln contends “distinguishing between official duty in terms of national interest and personal wish in terms of one’s moral values and political principles realized throughout the world” (Kauffman et al, pp. 149)
This double standard approach and the disregard to the less powerful nations’ political and economic interests seem to have characterized the U.S. foreign policy during the last several decades, leading to rise in Anti-Americanism, which in turn provided Islamic fanatics with the fuel they needed to inflict terror and destruction upon the U.S. and promote their ideology of hate across the Muslim world.
After 9/11, U.S. seemed to realize that it has to be mindful of the popular demands for freedom, justice and democracy dominating the world which the U.S. itself championed, and it can no longer apply the same Machiavellian standards in dealing with domestic and foreign affairs in an era of globalization and interconnectedness.
In June 20 of 2005, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice gave a historic speech at the American University in Cairo that seemed to have put an end to “situational ethics” and marked a major U.S. policy shift from political realism to neo-liberalism when she declared that “For 60 years, my country, the United States, pursued stability at the expense of democracy in this region here in the Middle East -- and we achieved neither. Now, we are taking a different course. We are supporting the democratic aspirations of all people”
Unfortunately, the hopes for more liberal foreign policy faded away after the rise of political Islam on the wings of democracy, which prompted the U.S. to revert back to its realist views and pursuit stability and security at the expense of democracy by continuing to support authoritarian regimes in the Middle East.
This double standard approach and the disregard to the less powerful nations’ political and economic interests seem to have characterized the U.S. foreign policy during the last several decades, leading to rise in Anti-Americanism, which in turn provided Islamic fanatics with the fuel they needed to inflict terror and destruction upon the U.S. and promote their ideology of hate across the Muslim world.
After 9/11, U.S. seemed to realize that it has to be mindful of the popular demands for freedom, justice and democracy dominating the world which the U.S. itself championed, and it can no longer apply the same Machiavellian standards in dealing with domestic and foreign affairs in an era of globalization and interconnectedness.
In June 20 of 2005, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice gave a historic speech at the American University in Cairo that seemed to have put an end to “situational ethics” and marked a major U.S. policy shift from political realism to neo-liberalism when she declared that “For 60 years, my country, the United States, pursued stability at the expense of democracy in this region here in the Middle East -- and we achieved neither. Now, we are taking a different course. We are supporting the democratic aspirations of all people”
Unfortunately, the hopes for more liberal foreign policy faded away after the rise of political Islam on the wings of democracy, which prompted the U.S. to revert back to its realist views and pursuit stability and security at the expense of democracy by continuing to support authoritarian regimes in the Middle East.
No comments:
Post a Comment