Introduction
Strategic culture can be defined as a set of beliefs, attitudes and norms towards the use of military force, Strategic culture refers to the relatively stable views that shape the utilization of military power to assert a country’s influence in the international community. This include the main pointers and variables that shape the way a country interacts with other countries. This is common with most major countries that seek to expand and grow their influence around the world. In today’s world, most analysts evaluate and analyze the strategic culture of UN Security Council Permanent members.
The purpose of this paper is to analyze and review the United States’ strategic culture. This will be done by deducing the United States’ strategic culture. What makes up the US Strategic culture? This will be answered in this section. Afterwards, there will be an evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of America’s strategic culture. This includes the evaluation and analysis of the implication and conclusion of the strategic culture of the American nation and people.
Key Concepts and Theories of America’s Strategic Culture
There are several pointers and several elements that define the strategic culture adopted by the United States of America. This goes back to the history of the United States and how it was developed over the years. There are four identifiable pointers that seem to define the main elements of strategic culture.
America’s primary foundation of a strategic culture is based on American Exceptionalism. This is based on the assumption that the United States is distinguished by the fact that it is a country that was formed on the basis of the respect of individuals’ civil liberties and the promotion of the rule of law to ensure that the United States’ government serves its people within an environment of free markets. This is because America’s independence was based on the need for taxation in return for representation. Thus, the tradition of the country is to ensure that it works to promote the civil liberties of people and institute deep forms of the separation of power, set up an independent Supreme Court and also maintain a written constitution.
American strategic culture is based on the exportation of American exceptionalism. This is because the first time America intervened in foreign affairs was when it instituted the Monroe Doctrine in the 1820s which was meant to intervene in newly independent American states when European powers moved to invade these countries. The implication was that America sought to promote its model of statehood and democracy to different countries. This formed the main ideology and philosophy that defines America’s strategic culture to this day.
However, America was quite throughout most of the 19th Century. It was a non-interventionist power and although America was recognized as a major power with military potential, the country hardly intervened during the period of isolationism. It was only during the Cuban Crisis of the late 1800s and the First World War that forced America to actively intervene in foreign countries and foreign lands militarily. Therefore, it is conclusive that American strategic culture is influenced significantly by American Exceptionalism which caused them to break away from isolationism.
Secondly, American strategic culture is based on a moral character of any nation it is intervening on behalf of. This is because America always sought to present a set of principles and regulations that every nation had to observe before they got an American support and assistance. Mention can be made of the Two World Wars. In World War I, US President, Wilson Woodrow presented the Fourteen Point Plan which was used to force Germany to surrender in return for peace. America’s involvement in World War II came after it had an agreement with the Allied Powers on how to free the colonized nations of Britain and France and promote democracy and human rights. In all other interventions – from Vietnam to Iraq, the precondition for entering wars, America demanded human rights, democracy and multiparty elections. This implies that America’s growth and entry into foreign matters is predicated on the ability of nations and peoples to accept a moral position and an improved system of handling things. This shows that the entry of America into foreign affairs is based on the consistent application of American Exceptionalism in foreign nations and foreign lands or cultures.
Thirdly, American Strategic Culture is based on a last-resort approach. This is because America does not intervene in foreign matters and foreign affairs unless it is very necessary. In the term of Barack Obama, it is often done on the basis of crossing “red lines”. This means that American believes in that liberal international relations theory which asserts that nations must have their own right to define their destiny. This indicates that Americans are always focused on promoting self-dependency, independence and national integrity as opposed to open colonization, empire formation and the like. They only intervene when it is very necessary to do so.
Fourthly, America’s strategic culture is inspired by free markets. This is often focused on the desire to pursue economic goals and economic ends as opposed to colonizing and imposing their rule over a given country. America seeks to enter, promote freedom and enhance the free market principles in order to ensure that the principles of demand and supply are applied and utilized in order to draw conclusions and make inferences in fixing prices and promoting trade. In many situations and instances, American companies are often able to promote their desires and expectations by supporting the overthrow and international interventions in foreign lands. This means that America’s wars are often influenced by individual interests and desires of large companies and powerful lobbyists who know how to deal with things in certain countries and communities.
Strengths of US Strategic Culture
The strength of the US Strategic Culture is in the fact that it promotes some of the best policies and concepts that is necessary for the development and advancement of different countries around the world. This is because other countries will develop and grow in order to achieve the best of processes around the world. Therefore, American strategic culture based on the promotion of democracy and human rights is something that makes the world a better place. It seeks to broker long-term structuring of nations in order to ensure that there is global stability and there is peace and democracy.
Unlike colonialism and domination, the US Strategic Culture is based on a desire to empower people to make the best of their potentials as a nation. This involves the formation of major agreements and presenting clear intentions to get nations to embrace American-type of democracy. This makes America a country that promotes the protection of human rights, civil liberties, democracy, rule of law and the protection of minority rights which was not the case with other global potentates and empires of the past. Most countries had sought to use their global powers to suppress others – the British formed empires where they created sub-human groups, raised people against the others competed with many others for lands and influence and this was responsible for all the wars around the world.
Secondly, the use of morality as the barometer for military intervention, America contributes to achieving a better world and an enhanced global order. This is because America is able to tie everything to the need for change and the modification of systems. America is able to identify things that will help to provide development and through this, America is able to provide a system whereby people are improved and enhanced in every way and procedure.
Thirdly, there is a high level of emotionality that comes with America’s quest for waging war. Unlike other potentates like China and the Soviet Union who wage war on the basis of what the top level communist leaders think, America goes to war in a way that is almost democratic. Governments are faced with demonstrations and pressure that is utilized in dealing with the need for the US government to do the right thing. If the government is caught up in a military intervention that is expensive or seen as fruitless, that government is often voted out in elections either to the legislature or the presidency. This happened in Vietnam and Iraq recently where war-supporting governments were voted out of power. This means there are democratic checks and balances that ensures that the US Strategic Culture is one that is fruitful and applied to cases and situations that are important and vital and needs to be dealt with.
Furthermore, Americas Strategic Culture is focused on productivity. This is because the country seeks to arrange all nations and ensure that they are able to build a productive economy and an economy that grows on a free market principle. This is because once a nation is invaded and a new government is formed, there is the need for the rebuilding of the nation. Rebuilding almost always comes as a result of the effort and productivity of the citizens. US Strategic Culture promotes a system whereby nations are put on a pedestal where they are able to engage in global trade and the international political economy through empowerment. Thus, America helps to kickstart the economies of nations they are involved in militarily and this helps to rebuild and promote a high degree of efficiency and promotes better understanding.
Disadvantages of the US Strategic Culture
In spite of the advantages and benefits the US Strategic Culture presents, there are some notable disadvantages that comes with it. First of all, it is not all nations that is ready to move onto a path of democracy, rule of law and human rights. It must be recalled that the first British colonies that became United States of America were established in 1604 and this was nurtured by British authorities and colonial officials for almost 200 years before America became independent. And even after independence, it took over 100 years before America became a global power and prosperity spread to all classes of human beings. Therefore, it might be a little naïve and inappropriate for America to try to force its form of democracy to all nations around the world. This is because development takes time and this kind of promotion of American Exceptionalism in nations around the world is almost always one that backfires in some countries and sometimes opens up the floodgates for major wars. An example is the Arab Spring which sought to promote democracy in nations around the Middle East and North America. This has led to a lot of bloodshed in some nations that were doing well under authoritarian rule.
There is realism which stands in the way of trying to promote and institute various forms of moral characterization in nations America has control over. This is because there are major problems and lapses that occur in nations that America seeks to protect and promote through its moral national character. A case in point is Apartheid South Africa which had major human rights abuses but was nonetheless considered an ally and a noble government by the United States of America.
The last resort approach sometimes creates serious problems and issues. For instance, there are times where slaughters which could have been avoided continues for several years because America seeks to apply its military intervention according to the last resort approach which is part of the strategic culture. This is because some wars and some bloodshed are such that they must be handled quickly. Thus, every US president adhering to the strategic culture has culminated in major genocides – George H. W. Bush presided over the country whilst 150,000 Liberians, a former US colony died. Bill Clinton sat back whilst over 800,000 Rwandans were killed in Rwanda. George W. Bush did nothing when the government of Darfur in Sudan slaughtered over 300,000 people. Barack Obama could not intervene when Bashar Al-Assad’s war in Syria led to the death of over 300,000 Syrians. This means that the culture of using military intervention as a last resort is something that leads to delays and supports bloodshed.
Emotionality and public opinion could lead to major problems and mistakes. Generally, it is identified that America intervenes where it has financial and economic interest. And as long as there is a financial interest, it is likely that lobbyists will influence the media to pursue a given approach to life and a given approach to intervention. This is often based on emotions rather than realities. Thus whilst 9/11 sought to create a consensus for America to field troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, there was little time to pause and consider some important matters like the fact that Saudi Arabian Wahabbism was behind the philosophy of 9/11. There was no pause to think about using alternatives, but just the blind demand for America to crack the whip against terrorists.
Conclusion
US strategic culture is based on American exceptionalism which means America must move to protect nations and encourage them to invoke the right to self-determination, civil liberties and rule of law. This is based on the view that US intervention must promote a moral national character. It is often done in a last resort and this is often due to emotionality of public opinion. It is often inspired by economics and the promotion of the free markets. The advantage is that American strategic culture promotes empowerments, ensures long-term human development and peace. The downside is that American strategic culture leads to selective justice, lateness in intervention and emotionalism in choosing nations to intervene in.
Bibliography
Adamsky, Dima. The Culture of Military Innovation: The Impact of Cultural Factors. Los Angeles: Stanford University Press, 2013.
Chappell, Laura. “Differing Member State Approaches to the Development of the EU Battlegroup Concept: Implications for CSDP” European Security 18(4), pp. 417-439, 2009
Handelman, Howard. Challenges of the Developing World. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2016
Harris, Brice. America, Technology and Strategic Culture: A Clausewitzian Assessment. New York: Routledge, 2012.
Mariner, Rosemary B. & Piehler, G. Kurt. The Atomic Bomb and American Society: New Perspectives. Knoxville: University of Tennesses Press, 2009
Williams, Oscar. African Americans and Colonial Legislation in the Middle Colonies. New York: Routledge, 2014
