| | | | Image of US Leadership Takes a Tumble – Almost Everywhere: Poll | | Global approval of America's leadership has fallen to the lowest in a decade, according to a new Gallup poll of more than 130 countries, with median global approval tumbling almost 20 points from 2016 — to 30 percent.
"But more important is the shift this has created in the global balance of soft power and what that means for US influence abroad," Gallup says. "With its stable approval rating of 41 percent, Germany has replaced the US as the top-rated global power in the world. The US is now on nearly even footing with China (31 percent) and barely more popular than Russia (27 percent)."
"Regionally, the image of US leadership suffered most in the Americas, where approval ratings dropped to a new low. It suffered nearly as much in Europe; however, approval ratings there are not the lowest on record — the ratings during the last two years of George W. Bush's administration still hold that distinction. In Asia, approval also dropped, tying the previous low during the Bush administration."
| | Will America Bring Its Nukes to a Cyber Fight? | | America's revised "Nuclear Posture Review" is expected to mark a radical departure in nuclear policy, suggests Gideon Rachman in the Financial Times. The United States is worried about a major cyber attack – and now the response could be a nuclear one.
"Introducing nuclear weapons into the equation…demonstrates how seriously the US is now taking the threat of cyber warfare; and is clearly designed to massively increase America's deterrence capacity," Rachman writes.
"At the same time, however, the policy shift carries considerable risks. By lowering the bar to the first use of nuclear weapons, it makes nuclear war more thinkable. The dangers of such a move are increased because concerns about nuclear proliferation are mounting — with North Korea's nuclear weapons program making rapid progress, and both Pakistan and Russia incorporating the early use of nuclear weapons into their war-fighting plans.
"Another danger is that any nation contemplating a cyber attack, may now also have to consider efforts to disable an adversary's nuclear capability. The US, for example, has almost certainly considered whether, in the event of a war, there are cyber or electronic means of taking out North Korea's nuclear missiles. Other nations will now have to make similar calculations about the US."
| | Why the Korea "Breakthrough" Might Be No Such Thing | | | The plan by the two Koreas to march together at the Winter Olympics allows South Korean President Moon Jae-in to deliver on his pledge to pursue reconciliation with Pyongyang. But this is far from a major breakthrough – and could be a propaganda win for Kim Jong Un, writes James Gibney for Bloomberg View.
"South Koreans will see another, more positive side of their neighbor to play on their understandable yearning for an eventual peaceful reunification of the peninsula. Kim, building on what has at times been a relatively vigorous cultural diplomacy campaign, can spin North Korea's participation back home as a sign of its international acceptance," Gibney says.
"But in the bigger picture, there are several reasons that this fluttering of Olympic spirit may not amount to anything greater. Kim's overarching goal is undoubtedly to drive a wedge between the US and South Korea. Yet for all Moon's hopes of reconciliation, he cannot afford to alienate the US, which guarantees South Korea's security. Nor can he go beyond the bounds of South Korean public opinion. Not only is the public blasé about the Olympics in general, it has responded coolly to this outbreak of sportpolitik." | | China's Latest Growth Figures are Great. That's a Problem | | China's latest GDP numbers were unexpectedly strong, with the economy expanding 6.9 percent last year. But not only are the country's numbers "implausibly smooth and steady" – they also mask the high price being paid by many Chinese for rapid growth, suggests Keith Bradsher in The New York Times.
"Strength in exports, retail sales and the property market has helped spur growth, putting China in a better position to tackle problems including a sharp climb in debt, severe pollution and other problems," Bradsher writes.
"But that growth has come at a high price: rising borrowing that has triggered downgrades of China's sovereign debt rating by credit rating agencies; severe pollution of China's air, water and soil; and persistent social problems associated with the movement of tens of millions of workers to cities who had little choice but to leave their children in their hometowns. President Xi Jinping signaled at an important Communist Party meeting in October that he wanted to address some of these chronic problems and that the country should no longer emphasize maximizing economic growth at almost any cost."
| | GOP, Look Past Trumpocracy: Frum | | Saturday marks a year since President Trump took the oath of office. But just a quarter of the way through his first term, it's already time for the Republican Party to think about what comes next – after "Trumpocracy," writes David Frum in The Atlantic.
"Maybe you do not much care about the future of the Republican Party. You should. Conservatives will always be with us. If conservatives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy. The stability of American society depends on conservatives' ability to find a way forward from the Trump dead end, toward a conservatism that cannot only win elections but also govern responsibly, a conservatism that is culturally modern, economically inclusive, and environmentally responsible, that upholds markets at home and US leadership internationally," Frum writes.
"In the most immediate sense, that means accepting that the Affordable Care Act is here to stay, and to work to reform it so that it costs less and protects middle-class families more. That means slowing the pace of immigration so that the existing population of the country does not feel it is being displaced and replaced. Economists will argue that a country with a slow-growing population needs more immigrants to sustain the growth of its labor force. But a population is a citizenry as well as a labor force, and when it grows slowly, it can less easily assimilate newcomers. Immigration is to natural population increase as wine is to food: a good complement, a bad substitute."
| | Time to Put the "Special" Back in the Special Relationship | | The special relationship between the United States and Britain has never been as important as it is today. It has also never been as imperiled, writes The Economist's Bagehot columnist. It's in the interests of both countries to revive it.
"Since the Iraq debacle, it has been fashionable to argue that the special relationship is a dangerous illusion sustained by Britain's nostalgic desire to punch above its weight and America's liking for yes-men. This is mistaken," Bagehot argues.
"The Anglo-American relationship is special because it is both deeper and broader than almost any other bilateral one. Deeper because America has borrowed so much from Britain, from common law, to joint-stock companies, to a version of the English language. Broader because the countries have intimate relations on every front, from economic, to cultural, to military. The intelligence relationship is particularly close, with the two countries sharing sensitive information and co-operating on new threats such as cyber-terrorism. The flap over Mr Trump's no-show is actually proof of the closeness of the relationship. The president is upset about the delays to his visit because he is fixated on a theme-park view of Britain as a land of royal pageants and golf clubs. The British public are adamant that he shouldn't come because they see American politics as an extension of their own." | | | | | | |
No comments:
Post a Comment