Country Case Report United States

The US Foreign Policy

Globalization is increasing the rate at which countries connect to each other. However according to the hyperglobalists point of view, this creates a lot of conflict on the free countries as the international countries look down upon the capability of governments to manage themselves. On the other hand, sceptics do not agree to this notion of globalization. They are of the view that countries are the main factors in modeling the order of the world. Transformationalist point of view however that this paper upholds state that the view held by the sceptics and hyperglobalists are way above what it is the truth. This brings about wrong attribution of the present world (Bruff, 261-280). This view upholds backs that far from bringing about suffering of a free state, globalization brings about the creation of obvious global politics where the ancient between the local and global issues are of no significance.

The attacks on the United States marked the beginning of global affairs. Due to the threat posed by terrorists, the United States borders were closed. Additionally the financial crisis has made the US to safeguard its main firms from global competition. This has brought about a decline in the economic globalization. This goes in line with what the sceptics state, however, it exaggerates globalization based on economic aspects; it goes against the economic reductionism. It does not focus on noneconomic aspects and sees them as of no consequence. It involves the social, political aspects as well.

There are varied patterns of globalization in several aspects. The economic form is more advanced than cultural form. The landscape is irregular. As noted in the outcome of the September 11 attacks in the US and crisis of 2008, the sceptics do not consider the speed of globalization military and technology. These trends have shown some ability in the wake of international instability and military matters. The United States is not integrated in a global process; it is more globalized and is able to acquire the benefits from it (Rosenberg, 2–74.). The poor countries however do not acquire this benefit. Globalization has some form adding and elimination hence bring about known winners and loser.

The United States is increasingly becoming separated from other countries in the contemporary globalization making it more asymmetric. It is hence through this that globalization does not bring about a unified society. The September 11 attack showed that the world as it becomes one social base, the more it separation arises.

Globalization is more seen as a western globalization bringing fears of imperialism and oppositions, protests and other actions to oppose it from other countries. This has hence brought tensions against the US, bringing about separation in thought and resulting to a world that is not easy to manage. The middle for instance has been a major enemy of the United States and its policies (Hay and Rosamond, 146-167). Additionally, there has resulted to a shift of power in global politics like China and Brazil. This has brought about the removal of dominance by the United States in maintaining order. The G20 has arisen due to the 2008 crisis and is evidence of the emergence of a new crop of economic states.

The present form of globalization has a high impact on the international association; the WTO to transnational firms. The present form of globalization is quite different when compared to the initial form of globalization. It is through this that the present form of globalization does away with the hindrances and chances faces by governments, controlling the autonomy more so in terms of economic space (Lai-Ha, et al, 3?19). This form of globalization involves the elements that a country operates in applies blocks on the ability of the country just as the United States.

How US has adjusted to the period of G-Zero World and Beijing Consensus

The 2008 financial crisis was the end of the global order. With the G-8 meeting, the US is not in a position to lead things on the present matters. It has cut down its help in Syria and Iran. There has been an end of the Afghan war. The leadership is being passed to another state. Basically, the foreign policy is based on issues.

With the G-zero, the world has gotten involved in a series of change. The United States is not at all leading in regards to stabilizing the economy of the world, retrogressive the impact of global effect and handling internet security. With a number of countries like the US not in a position to lead considering the interests the other countries have, there has arisen a period of G-Zero.

The G-Zero period is a blustery, doubtful setting where the relations on international matters are ignored. However, this new setting, though hard, is quite easy for the US. It presents chances for the country to exploit on this new base. The defense expenditures are half of the world and still are way high. The 2008 crisis has highlighted the success the US has. The country goes on to thrive in entrepreneurship, undertaking studies and advancement, academics and technology. Additionally, it is the biggest producer of gas making it less susceptible to price hinges or food limitations.

In regards to democracy, the US is the leading in rule of law, freedom and clarity as well as free commercial operations (Nayyar, 131-147). The gender gap of the country has been fairly stable with equal opportunities for everyone. The country has been determined to succeed in every aspect; hence with the limitation of leadership positions, it still remains to be desired by other states for support in more than one area.

The Beijing Consensus brings to light the prevailing advancement tendencies with a basis on China’s way of advancement efficiency and experience. It is not presented on the basis of hindered advancement like a rigidly managed route to advancement; it brings about admittance to the global community using manner that safeguards life and political options of the developing countries.

The consensus has brought about a shift in the landscape making China a leading force. The dominance initially enjoyed by the US has been challenged through the creation of options to the prior advancement manner applied. The developing countries have grown to be reliant on China in aid. Policy planners and the US have to take to mind the advancement posed by China. It has affected the relations with the US, China has grown to be less reliant on the US and presented a higher competition platform that matches the US and is seen to even go above. Other states are now shifting their focus and relations from the US and directing it to China. The United States has hence been forced to rethink its strategy and apply new measures so as to stay relevant in the highly competitive environment.

How Identity Politics Diaspora Group affect Economic Advancement

The economic development of a country relies on every elements of the country. The diaspora and identity politics have their role in advancement of the economy of the country (Stefanovic, 263 – 272). They play a number of major roles in planning development, decline of poverty index of the country and economic success. This is inviting focus form policy which is composed of the diaspora, local and foreign states. The diaspora and the relevant grouping in United States have brought about a great impact on the creation of employment, commercial connections, investment as well as affecting the social and culture of a country.

After the financial crisis in 2008, the diaspora groups and the identity of politics has gone to elevate the status of a country in regards to development. The United States has been able to manage itself so as to safeguard its interests.

A number of tendencies have elevated the focus on policy in the diaspora. There is an elevated sense of consciousness in states on the ability for reducing poverty levels and economic advancement. This forced efforts to get into contact with the diaspora groups, to promote double citizenship and to beneficially affect the imaginations and opinions of the emigrants in the local and foreign countries (Safran, 83–99). The increase of well managed groups in the foreign countries relates to the confirmation of the civil groups as a base of significant growth actor and the rise in local projects.

In a number of instances in the United States, the groups in the diaspora has undertaken major roles in facilitating and bringing about open consciousness regarding people in foreign states. Technology has been useful in this growth and modern means of development has been quite useful. Lastly, the accreditation of the restrictions of local growth guidelines is bent on study of emerging and corresponding growth sectors.

There are however disadvantages on the integration of the diaspora in growth rules currently. The migration aspect in whole is not included in the advancement process and a number of models are formed with no sharing of skills and resources (Shi, 55–72). For example, a limited number of strategies to develop the country involve external people being formal participants. Limited number researches evaluate the real implication of how the diaspora affects the growth of country; it is done in commercial transaction, capital exchanges therefore bringing about a limitation of information based on the economic involvement that the diaspora has.

The political identity held by the United States of America has been upheld and brought about development in several fronts. The identity that the US has acquired has been beneficial as well as of disadvantage more to the Middle East countries. Americans in the foreign countries have accredited as murders more so by Muslim countries while in other countries it has been accredited as being a super democracy worth following. The US currently stands as a good example to follow in terms of its democracy.

Work Cited

Bruff, Ian. Making Sense of the Globalisation Debate when Engaging in Political Economy         Analysis. British Journal of Politics and International Relations 7 (2): 261-280. 2005.           Print.

Hay, Colin and Rosamond, Ben. Globalisation, European Integration and the discursive construction of economic imperatives. Journal of European Public Policy 9 (2): 146-167.         2002. Print.

Lai-Ha, Chan, Pak K. Lee, and Gerald Chan. “Rethinking global governance: a China model in the making?” Contemporary Politics 14, no. 1: 3?19. 2008. Print.

Nayyar, Deepak. Globalization, History and Development: A Tale of Two Centuries, Cambridge    Journal of Economics, 30, Pp. 131-147. 2006. Print.

Rosenberg, J. ‘Globalization Theory: A Post Mortem’. International Politics 42(2): 2–74. 2005.         Print.

Safran, W. ‘Diasporas in modern societies: myth of homeland and return’, Diaspora, vol. 1,

9. 1, pp. 83–99. 1991. Print.

Stefanovic, Z. Globalization: theoretical perspectives, impacts and institutional response of the    economy. Economics and Organization Vol. 5, No 3, pp. 263 – 272. 2008. Print.

Shi, Y. Identity Construction of the Chinese Diaspora, Ethnic Media Use, Community    Formation, and the Possibility of Social Activism. Continuum: Journal of Media &     Cultural Studies Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 55–72. 2005. Print.