The unipolar moment is over—Obama recognizes it.
Bhadrakumar, Career Diplomat, ‘09
(M. K. Bhadrakumar, Career Diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service, 7/11/09, http://www.atimes.com/atimes/
Such bitter political legacy apart, the mode of Russian foreign policy too has shifted to a "proactive type"
in comparison with the "reactive type" of policy, as was the case when NATO dismembered Yugoslavia
or the US occupied Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003. Equally, Russia, like the rest of the
world, is conscious that the US's "unipolar moment" has ended and that Obama
probably realizes the futility of any attempt to preserve the colossal inertia of
"unipolarity" in political or psychological terms.
Thus, the summit in Moscow provided an
extraordinary pageantry to outline or to give greater definition to the promised reset in US-Russian
The world’s moved on—hegemony’s over.
Sanders, Chair of Peace and Conflict Studies at Berkley, ‘09
(Jerry W. Sanders, Chair of Peace and Conflict Studies at Berkley, Author of “Peddlers of Crisis: The Committee of
the Present Danger and politics of Containment,” 11/1/09, http://www.thenation.com/doc/20071119/sanders/)
This may seem to be good news for Democrats
, but their complacency and their caution thus far
suggest otherwise--and could prove their undoing. If they have been quick to denounce neoconservative
fantasies of empire for having alienated much of the world, their nostalgia for a return to the
hegemony of the Truman--or perhaps Kennedy, or even Clinton era--is itself a
prescription for a world
, and a United States, that no longer exists.
True, the Democrats wish to
reinvigorate diplomacy and lessen dependence on military force. They also spin out visions of a grand
alliance of democracies and offer a nod to multilateralism, promising to consult with those they insist
must once again fall dutifully behind America's rightful lead.
While the distinction between neoconservative claims to empire and liberal hegemony may be
appreciated by academic theorists and policy wonks, the difference of these two approaches may escape a
world grown deeply distrustful of US intentions and an American public impatient to chart a new course,
not merely tinker with the old one. The world has not stood in place during the past decade
waiting for the Democrats to retake the White House and reassert their own brand of
dominance. What might have seemed