Prudence in a Changing World

Upon reading Lang’s, in my opinion, realistic perception of the US and its strategy of preponderance, I believe Lang’s ideas are truthful and prudent. The USA's emergence and capabilities as a superpower came from its military, political, and economical strength based on capitalism and free trade. While military strength and political stability might have served as the foundation for economic prosperity, it is the American workforce and free market trade that, not only, indirectly funds the military in the first place, but continues to ensure the leading position of the USA in the world market. Therefore, as crucial as military balance of power, or rather “imbalance in one’s favor,” proves to provide the security and political stability for economic interdependence and trade, wealth and affluency must still be attained primarily to continue to fund the growing superpower’s military needs and ensure its leading position. Therefore, Lang is necessarily prudent in his stress of military, economic, and political strength to reach and maintain hegemonic power, yet his redundancy might overlook the need and ability for trade, precisely as a result of interdependence.

While countries may try to limit their dependence on another country, no country is entirely self-sufficient and, therefore, if a certain demand is present, these countries must trade on the world market, despite any element of mistrust. As quoted in the article, many scholars believe the US is not acting in a threatening manner and takes into account the interests of others, thus making others wish to ally with the US, and America’s “soft-power” legitimizes its “exercise of hegemonic power.” “It falls to the hegemonic power to provide the stable, secure conditions that interdependence requires” (Lang). Lang feels, however, this “unchecked power” will lead to the demise of the US because the rise of other great powers will be beyond deterrence. Yes, the rise of other powers, such as Russia, China and India, will force the USA to eventually share its power position and, therefore, it should begin to consider a balance of power strategy to some extent. However, there are many variables that will affect the course of events, such as the rate of development of those countries, which will necessitate significant economic reforms to sustain current growth rates. Those reforms can only be implemented in a society that has a stable political climate, free of corruption and restricting "red tape" in the form of unnecessarily cumbersome rules and regulations, giving the individual citizens an incentive to contribute their talents to the best of their abilities. As it stands now, it will take many years before the right circumstances will be created in those countries to where they become economical and political rivals to the USA. When security in the international system is scarce, however, trade diminishes; states seek to maximize their power (economic and military) over their rivals, and hence attempt to ensure they become richer than their rivals (Lang). Indeed, one potentially destabilizing factor is the rise of islamic governments, such as Iran, which are not driven by the same political and economical objectives and do not wish to be bound by international agreements, thus threatening the hegemonic power of the USA and endangering the political and economical stability and interdependence in the world. In view of these developments, it is important that the USA understands the changing political and economical forces and the need to review its strategy preponderance.