124 PSC "The Liberalistic Policy Agenda of Barack Obama and "'A Global Good Neighbor Ethic for International Relations'" A liberalistic perspective can also be called Idealism, Internationalism, Institutionalism, or Pluralism. This perspective focuses on maximizing the well being of states, and has the central principal of self-determination. The means it goes by to reach these goals is through the military, organizations, regimes, and a plethora of laws. (Goldstein & Pevenhouse, 2008). Two examples of this perspective in policy would be the agenda of Barack Obama and "A Global Good Neighbor Ethic for International Relations". Obama is a democratic candidate for the 2008 presidential election. "A Global Good Neighbor Ethic for International Relations" is a document written by Tom Barry and a few other authors that discusses a new foreign policy for the United States. Although Both Obama and "A Global Good Neighbor Ethic for International Relations" have a liberalistic theoretical perspective when it comes to their position on issues pertaining to the United States and the rest of the global community, they have policies with both similar and different plans of attack. There are many viewpoints expressed in "A Good Neighbor Ethic for International Relations" that express a liberalistic perspective. The actors that this ethics guideline deems important are the United States, intergovernmental organizations such as the United Nations, nongovernmental organizations, like churches and multinational corporations like Wal-Mart. All of these actors are seen as important because they all deal with the global community as a whole which is one of the features of a liberalistic perspective. It deals with not just the well being of the state but the community as well. An example in "A Good Neighbor Ethic for International Relations" would be the relationship between the United States and Multinational Corporations. It says, "A foreign policy that equates the objectives of Wal-Mart, Exxon/Mobil, Halliburton, and Lockheed Martin with U.S. national interest is badly askew" (Barry et al., 2005: 5). This is significant because this is saying that the US needs to make sure when it
makes policies, they are looking at the best interests for the global community as a whole, and not just them and a MNC. Obama also views important actors to be IGOs, NGOs and MNC's. By identifying these groups as important actors in international relations, a collective approach is being taken and it may become easier for mutual cooperation to occur since both parties are able to see that little people are just as important as the larger ones. Another topic this paper addresses conflicts that the United States is having and ways that it can fix them. In principal two, new foreign and domestic policies are addressed. One issue it specifically mentions is, "Current foreign and domestic policies represent interests that diverge sharply from the welfare of the common citizen. They are policies that favor narrow economic interest and define US national security as asserting military power" (Barry et al., 2005:5)This is significant because it is showing how the United State's main foreign policy strategy involves the military. In principal three, the category is reciprocity and cooperation and in it solutions are suggested for fixing the United State's relationship between other nations. One thing it mentions is working with other countries to promote transnationalism (Barry et al., 2005: 6). "We now must rely on each other to solve planetary problems such as climate change, public health pandemics, population displacement, international criminal and terrorist networks and cultural clashes" (Barry et al., 2005: 6). This continues and talks about how as citizens we need to address these issues and join together as consumers, church goers and a community to help find solutions (Barry et al., 2005: 6). This needs to be done on an international level as well. In this policy it discusses utilizing the IGOs as well. In Principal Four, it says, "International cooperation, whether through institutions like the UN or through international treaties and conventions, is not an end in itself but a means to an end. When the processes and institutions of international cooperation are weak or flawed, we should not hesitate to suggest multilateral mechanisms to make them more effective" (Barry et al., 2005: 7). This is basically saying that the United States needs to address these issues and work collectively with the outside community to and use the resources and groups it has available to make
this happen. When dealing with conflicts and cooperation, the biggest example comes from Obama's stance in regards to American diplomacy one constant theme is making friends with our enemies. Obama says he is "willing to meet with the leaders of all nations, friend and foe...it will signal that America is ready to come to the table...and if America is willing to come to the table, the world would be more willing to rally behind American leadership to deal with challenges like terrorism, and Iran and North Korea's nuclear problems" (www.barakobama.com/issues/foreignpolicy). All of these things deal with the liberalistic perspective because they deal with the ideals of reciprocity and mutual cooperation. (GOLDSTEIN & Pevehouse, 2008: 84). When examining "A Global Good Neighbor Ethic for International Relations" it also talks a lot about the community and Independence. This all basically means how the United States builds itself as a community. One thing that is stressed is "before the United States can credible promote sustainable development through its foreign policy, it must practice sustainable development at home" (Barry et al., 2005: 10). In order to do this it proposes "a new package of social democratic reforms....to provide basic safety nets, to ensure the fruits of growth are shared widely, to empower the market's inherit tendency toward increasing inequality, to restore and protect our children's environmental patrimony and make genuine equality reality" a (Barry et al., 2005: 11). Barack wants to help create more jobs for the American people. He says he"will make long-term investments in education, training, and workforce development so that Americans can leverage our strengths - our ingenuity and entrepreneurialism - to create new high-wage jobs and prosper in a world economy" (www.barackobma.com/issues/economy). By creating new jobs, we are expanding America's economy and making it so America will not have to be completely reliant on foreign markets. These things are very liberalistic because they provide a new outlook for the US economy and show the self determination of America. One thing that is stressed in this policy is security. This is most deeply stressed in Principal Five, Balanced Security. In this it talks about the threats to US security and suggestions to fix these threats.
Certain things that are deemed as threats in this sections are transnational terrorists, weapons of mass destruction (Barry et al,. 2005: 8). In order to fix this they suggest curbing access to destructive weapons, passing laws and giving judges and police the power to enforce these laws. (Barry et al., 2005:9). In this it is also stressed the importance of International Cooperation, without it these rules would be really hard to enforce. In terms of the US's military A Global Good Neighbor's Ethic suggest using it to defend from attacks, counter terror attacks and support peacekeeping. (Barry et al., 2005: 9). Obama sees some of the problems with our national security lying within the military as well. One of his suggestions include retraining the military so it has more experience, adding 65,000 soldiers and 27,000 to the marines to better prepare ourselves for the elements (www.barakobama.com/issues/foreignpolicy). Both of these policies are very idealistic. They are very easy to propose into laws, and strategies, but much harder to carry out. Comparing and contrasting Obama and "A Global Good Neighbor Ethic for International Relations", you see many similarities and differences. A similarity comes from geopolitics and globalization, which are both are issues that are at the first level of the funnel when dealing with foreign policy. Both Barack Obama and A Good Neighbor Ethic feels they should show mutual respect to other countries, whether it comes to meeting with all of them, which Barack's approach is or just being more respecting their borders as a whole which is more of the sense that comes from the Good Neighbor Ethic. In terms of globalization, Barack wants to fight for fair trade. "He will fight for a trade policy that opens up foreign markets....and use trade agreements to spread good labor and environmental standards around the world (www.barakobama.com/issues/economy). This helps show liberalistic qualities because they are not just respecting individual states they are supporting the global community as a whole. One of the biggest differences occurs at level two, interstate. Obama wants to amend the North American Free Trade Agreement to help American workers' benefit
(www.barakobama.com/issues/economy). In "A Global Good Neighbor Ethic for International Relations", the section although it does not come right out and say it, considers NAFTA to be a failure. It says, "Assessing the results of more than a decade of trade regulated by the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)...it is clear that the US- led economic model fails to meet its promises to developing countries" (Barry et al., 2005: 11). These show different viewpoints because where Obama is more open to reforming the issues that NAFTA has; The Good Neighbor Ethic seems more interested in pointing out its faults and getting rid of the program. Another similarity comes from the level four approach, which are individual influences. Both Obama and "A Global Good Neighbor Ethic" seem concern about seen as a good neighbor to the rest of the world. The fact that Barack is willing to sit down with all world leaders and discuss issues is a big deal. By doing this he is showing other countries he is ready to work with them and do it in a non threatening manner. In terms of the "Global Good Neighbor Ethic" principal one deals solely with mutual respect. In it is says, "it must not be based on arrogance and materialism but on civic pride and generosity; not pm a unilateral sense of "mission" but on a collaborative role as global partner" (Barry et al,. 2005: 4). By doing this the United States is demanding respect and creating its own influential sphere by sending the message we will respect you, therefore you have no reason to disrespect us. This would help to collectively unite the global community. The main point of these policies is that each deals with the United States and its viewpoint on what should be done in regards of foreign affairs in terms of relations with the global community as whole. Both Obama and "A Global Good Neighbor Ethic for International Relations" have a liberalistic view on these points because they are both optimistic that these policies when put forth would be successful. Also they both examine the global community as whole and look for the best possible option for everyone and not just the US. Although these polices may differ at times, what is important to see is that they have a similar political agenda and strategy. Both Barack and "Global Good Neighbor Ethic for
International Relations" have bright ideas for the future and if any of these polices get implemented there may be hope for the United States to bounce back from its current state.
Alana Holly PSC 124
Biblography Barry, Tom, et al. "A Global Good Neighbor Ethic for International Relations." International Relations Center. 2008. 16 Feb. 2008 <http://ggn.irc-online.org/neighbor/142.hrml>. Goldstein, Joshua, and Jon Pevehouse. International Relations. 8th ed. New York: Pearson Longman, 2008 Obama, Barack. Economy. 2008. February 19, 2008. <www.barackobama.com/issues/economy>. Obama, Barack. Foreign Policy. 2008. February 19, 2008. <www.barackobama.com/issues/foreignpolicy>.