战略与国际研究中心-Capacity-and-Resolve_152页_2mb

Summary of "Capacity and Resolve: Foreign Assessments of U.S. Power"

Core Content

This report provides an analysis of how various global powers perceive the United States' influence and capacity to lead in the international arena over the next decade. It examines foreign views on U.S. power from Asia, Middle East, and Eurasia, highlighting the interplay between capacity and resolve as key factors in sustaining U.S. leadership. The report is authored by a group of experts from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) and edited by Craig S. Cohen, with a foreword by John J. Hamre.

Main Views and Key Information

1. U.S. Power Perception: Capacity vs. Resolve

• The report emphasizes that while many countries perceive the U.S. as in decline relative to rising powers like China, they do not expect a fundamental shift in the global order.
• Foreign expectations of U.S. power remain high, but concerns are growing about the U.S. resolve and competence to address global challenges.
• The economic crisis and military engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan have strained U.S. resources and credibility, but the U.S. still maintains a strong military presence and technological edge.

2. Regional Assessments

Asia

• China: Views the U.S. as a powerful but uncoordinated actor. While it respects U.S. capabilities, it is skeptical of its long-term commitment to the region.
• Japan: Sees the U.S. as a reliable ally and a key player in maintaining regional stability. It values the U.S. military presence and its role in balancing China's rise.
• Korea: North Korea remains a threat to regional stability, while South Korea sees the U.S. as a necessary partner in security and economic cooperation.
• Indonesia: Perceives the U.S. as a major global power but is concerned about its unfocused foreign policy and lack of regional engagement.
• India: Views the U.S. as a strategic partner, but believes the current international system is biased toward the Euro-Atlantic. It is pushing for a more equitable global order.

Middle East

• Israel: Sees the U.S. as a key ally in regional security, but is increasingly skeptical of its commitment to the region, especially after the Arab Spring.
• Persian Gulf: Countries like Saudi Arabia and Qatar are divided in their views. Some see the U.S. as a necessary stabilizer, while others are cautious about its long-term involvement.
• The Arab Spring has created new political dynamics, but it is too early to assess the long-term impact on U.S. influence. The U.S. is seen as a symbol of hope but also as a source of concern due to its perceived inconsistency and lack of reform.

Eurasia

• Russia: Has tempered its pessimism about U.S. power and is now more open to multipolarity. It sees the U.S. as a critical variable in shaping regional stability.
• Turkey: Views the U.S. as a strategic partner but is increasingly critical of its policies. It has adopted a "zero problems with neighbors" policy, which may lead to new regional alignments.
• Germany: Has diminished faith in U.S. leadership and is willing to challenge U.S. policies that it perceives as misaligned with its interests.

Key Questions and Implications

• Is the current international system stable?

  • Yes, the report argues that the system is inherently stable, as no regional power would want to challenge the U.S. directly.
  • Regional conflicts are more likely than a global confrontation between the U.S. and a regional power.

• Is the system durable?

  • The U.S. is likely to remain a global superpower for the foreseeable future due to:
    • A growing demographic base (albeit slowly).
    • A strong intellectual and research foundation.
    • A robust military despite fatigue from wars.
    • A consensus to sustain defense spending at around 3.5% of GDP.

• What is the future of U.S. leadership?

  • The U.S. will continue to play a central role in global affairs, but its relative dominance will decline.
  • The report warns against internal division and insularity as potential threats to U.S. leadership, more so than external challenges.

Challenges and Uncertainties

• Regional powers are unlikely to bandwagon against the U.S. or challenge it unilaterally.
• Non-state actors are not seen as a major threat to U.S. primacy.
• The global recession has affected U.S. fiscal health and military readiness, but the U.S. still has the capacity to lead.
• The G-20 is seen as a more representative forum than the G-8, but it lacks effectiveness in addressing security issues.
• The U.S. must adapt to a multipolar world, where China, India, and Brazil are rising powers.

Conclusion

The report concludes that while the U.S. is not in decline, its resolve and competency are under scrutiny. The international system is stable but evolving, and the U.S. must maintain its leadership through diplomatic, economic, and military strength. The key challenge lies not in external forces, but in the U.S.'s ability to manage its global role in an increasingly complex and multipolar world.