OF PARADISE AND POWER

Former diplomat and current conservative think-tanker Kagan (A Twilight Struggle: American Power and Nicaragua, 1996) rehashes an argument he originally offered in 2001 in Policy Review.

That argument goes like this: During the Cold War, the developed world fell into two camps, one dominated by the US, the other by the Soviet Union. The former had need “to preserve and demonstrate the existence of a cohesive ‘West,’ ” and so political divisions between, say, Germany and the US tended to be muted, at least on an official level. Though it begs for a united front of defense, today’s common enemy—Islamic fundamentalism—does not demand the same coherence, which allows Europe to turn away from superpower big-stick formulas, to move “beyond power into a self-contained world of laws and rules and transnational negotiation and cooperation.” The US, conversely, is settling into its role as the world’s sole superpower, able to accomplish at least some of its tasks in the “anarchic Hobbesian” world by virtue of its military might. Europe, of course, benefits from this situation, even while clucking its tongue and attempting to “control the behemoth by appealing to its conscience,” which Kagan considers to be a pretty good strategy that usually works. The upshot? Interpretations may vary, but Kagan offers a genteel solution for both sides: Europe should let us do what we must to keep the peace, recognizing that “we have only just entered a long era of American hegemony.” And America shouldn’t try to bully Europe into accepting the unpalatable, and perhaps even listen to our putative allies from time to time. Though he’s capable of concocting a memorable sound bite, Kagan develops his nuanced argument with an appreciation for why Europeans are not now lining up alongside us to give Saddam a good thrashing.

Good reading for policy wonks who missed the original article, of a piece with recent arguments for the virtues of American imperialism.