The interviewer summarizes Bremmer's book:
In ‘Superpower’ you outline three possible courses for American foreign policy: 1) keeping faith with the old “Indispensable” America that underwrites global stability 2) adopting a “moneyball” approach where the US pursues its narrow economic and security interests, or 3) an “Independent” America where the US gives up trying to solve the world’s problems, but seeks instead to lead by example by investing in America’s security and prosperity at home.Bremmer doesn't believe American voters support "indispensable" any longer, probably because we haven't been successful at it in the last quarter century.
‘Indispensable’ America is now an increasingly extreme sell, domestically, for any American president. Americans have gotten disillusioned with the inauthenticity of their own leaders, and the politics and politicians in Washington.Fearing the U.S. will continue to muddle along with no discernible strategy, Bremmer concludes the interview thus:
The September 11 attacks came when US was at the peak of its international power. So even if the United States massively screwed things up it still had all sorts of ability to align the rest of the world behind it. But if you have that kind of reaction in five or ten years when China is the world's biggest economy, that could be a hit that America doesn't come back from. That could really change the world order in a dangerous way. I don't think anyone is thinking about that - and that worries me.It should worry everyone who expects to live another 10 years. Hat tip to Drudge Report for the link.
