Taming American Power: The Global Response to U.S. Primacy
Americans tend to see U.S. preeminence as benign or positive -- but around the world, it arouses worry, fear, and resentment. In this landmark book on U.S. power and grand strategy in the age of unipolarity, Walt provides the most lucid and sophisticated account yet of why these negative reactions arise. Drawing on insights from realist theory, he argues that global concern over American dominance is rooted in the insecurities and uncertainties that inevitably exist in a world of anarchy and unequal power. Put simply, other states "worry because the United States is strong enough to act pretty much as it wishes, and other states cannot be sure that Washington will not use its immense power to threaten their own interests." Much of the book explores the strategies that states are using to oppose or counteract U.S. primacy. Although Walt does not find much evidence of full-scale balancing, he does see states using an array of less direct measures to counter U.S. power, such as building realms of regional autonomy and attempting to ensnare the hegemon in international rules and norms. To navigate these troubled waters, he recommends a radical shift by Washington away from a hegemonic grand strategy to one of "off-shore balancing" -- that is, resisting imperial or liberal internationalist activism, particularly in the Middle East, in favor of selective engagement and leading by example. It remains a question, however, whether in a world transformed by globalization and menaced by violent groups, the United States can really pull back from its geopolitical commitments and security leadership.
Related
Jimmy Carter's high-profile parachutes for peace earn scorn from some and admiration from others. From Haiti to North Korea, the ubiquitous former president helps resolve disputes with his unshakable confidence in the power of moral suasion. But Carter's penchant for bucking U.S. foreign policy has strained his relations with the Washington establishment, and the Clinton administration has not always treated him with the respect he deserves. Lost in the controversy are the humanitarian achievements on which his reputation will ultimately rest.
Richard Holbrooke's gripping memoir shows how he improvised a makeshift peace in what was left of Bosnia despite a timorous Pentagon, a reluctant president, waweirding allies, and brutal ethnic cleansers. But the Dayton Accord came too late.
The difference between the factions in Bosnia is not morality, as the Bosnian Muslims and Western press insist, but power and opportunity. All have the same goal: to avoid living as a minority. All have committed crimes against other ethnic groups. Despite its claims of neutrality and preaching against military solutions, the United States has favored the Bosnian Muslims, keeping silent as they launched offensives from U.N.-guarded safe areas. Since air strikes cannot resolve the conflict, the United States must discourage violence by all sides and let Russia--the one country Serbs trust--take the lead in negotiations.

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.