Hegemonism is the first logic that Patrick Callahan explains about it in his book, "Logics of American Foreign Policy, Theories of America’s World Role"

1. logic of Hegemonism
in the US Foreign Policy
based on Patick Kallahan’s book, titled: Logics of American Foreign Policy
Presented by: @issa_adeli

2. Basic Points
• Hegemonism calls upon the US , as the worlds most powerful
country, to provide the world with the leadership necessary for
the effective functioning of international system.
• effective functioning of international system is essential to the
national interests of the US.
• The US has the sufficient power to provide the international
system with leadership.
• Leadership must serve the common good, both for common good
and because it is morally obligatory.

3. What is hegemony?
• Preponderant Influence or authority of one nation over another
• There are demands from the most powerful country in the world to exercise such influence,
but not all demands. Only demands for a kind of leadership that is required to ensure the
Effective Function of the international system.
• Stable order Pax Americana
• Hegemonism requires the US to maintain and prolong its primacy.
• Multilateralism is not against Hegemonism. It spreads costs. But if necessary, a leader must
act alone.
• Power Transition Theory Primacy of the US is the most important thing. Hegemonism
requires the US to maintain and prolong its primacy.
• Logic of Hegemonism rests on 2 promises:
• American well-being requires establishing and maintaining effective international system in both the
political and economic realm.
• US leadership is the drive wheel of such systems.

4. The US National Interest - Political Sphere
• The main function is Security and Order.
• Instability is dangerous because it spreads:
• It creates an incentive for others to intervene.
• It disrupts social order and create war economy
• It mobilizes labor into armed forces.
• Flight of other labor away from the area
• It harms trading partners because of scarcity and inflation.
• Force people to seek refuge in neighboring countries.
• Exacerbate internal conflicts
• It will tend to draw countries to intervene in support of those who are like them.
• It disturbs the regional balance of power
• Successful aggression encourages aggression
• Hindering solving problems, using up resources, devastating cooperation
• Deterrence is self-reinforcing

5. The US National Interest - Economic Sphere
• Wellbeing needs growth  Growth needs global trade, self
sufficiency is not prosperous Trade needs purchasing power in
other countries  other economies must grow  they need
liquidity  US is the drive wheel  Unlimited engagement
• Vicious Circle: Export Revenue Economic Capacity Export
Revenue
• Deviation From Free Trade Principles
• Lowering tariffs to Stop vicious circle
• Sanction rogue states

6. Why the US hegemony?
• Leadership is necessary.
• No other nation can provide leadership
• International institutions cannot provide collective leadership.
• Leadership is required + no one else can provide it the US is
bound to lead

7. The Necessity for Leadership
• Benefits of effective international system are long-term and diffuse and
collective.
• All states are tempted to be free-riders
• Leadership is required to break the logic of collective inaction
• The benefits of action > the cost of inaction
• States are leaders that their stakes in the system is so great that they
would stand to lose much if it failed, and that their power is so great
that they can act on their own at costs that, relative to their stakes, are
relatively low

8. The US is the only country that can provide
leadership
• Japan, Russia, India, Brazil, Indonesia could not replace the US.
• China’s deficiencies are severe:
• Aging Population
• Political Structure is weak.
• Rapid growth ignites social problems.
• Hostile Neighbors
• Environmental Disaster
• European Union
• Lacking integration
• Lacking intention
• Russia
• Economy size compare to Italy
• Single-product economy
• Political structure is weak.

9. The US is the only country that can provide
leadership: International institutions are unable
• Benefits of international organizations
• Increase legitimacy
• Share burdens
• Supplementing the US leadership
• International Institutions
• These institutions that provide leadership requires countries to stop being
free riders.
• In the absence of genuine multipolarity, multilateralism guarantees failure.

10. US Economic Power
• GDP = 10.2 tD, bigger than 3 big economies after her (2001)
• ¼ of the whole world production (2001)
• 12 pct of the world exports and 19 pct of the world imports (2001)
• 44.8 bD sales in conventional weapon systems, 45 pct of the world’s total, equal the sales
totals of the 7 next largest suppliers combined (1997-2001)
• 45 pct of FDI (2000)
• 1/5 of the worlds foreign aid
• Influence on IMF, World Bank, and other international economic organizations
• The US economy generates power in several ways:
• It provides a lever for direct influence (fear of being cut from its market, resources, and rewards).
• It gives a veto power over ideas it does not like, because few international problems can be solved without
the US.
• It provides resources for other levers, like military forces.

11. American economy is not declining
• In the post war years, the US share of world economy was
artificially inflated.
• Now, the Europeans and Japanese completed recovery
• The US decline is ending
• In 1995 the military was only half the size it had been in 1967

12. US military prowess
• Biggest army after china (1.4m Americans to 2.5 Chinese)
• With “revolution in military affairs,” its lead in critical technologies as stealth,
remote sensing, and precision guidance enabled a decisive victory in short time
at minimal loss of lives.
• Technological superiority which needs investment
• Military budget more than 5 countries after her = 1/3 of the whole world
military budget = more than all NATO members = 3 times more than Russia = 4
times more than China
• Intelligence budget = 27.5 bD, more than the total military budgets of all but 5
other nations
• The only country who can operate far from home
• 800 army base in 70 countries (61 major bases in 19 countries)

13. Over commitment
• Hegemonism wants to increase investment in foreign affairs
• The burden of foreign policy is much less now than it was before
• In 1995, the military was half the size it had been in 1967, 1980s,
and the year before Vietnam war
• 20 pct of federal budget, compared to 50 pct in 1960
• Share of economy (less than 4 pct) is less than befor 1970
• Less expenditure on diplomatic representation and foreign
assistance than 1950, 1960

14. Cultural influence
• Soft power = admired model
• Popular culture has global reach
• Persuasion makes coercion unnecessary
• Politically the US is an admired model.

15. Congenial international environment
• Most of other major powers are generally friendly to the US
• With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US faces no powerful
adversary.
• Terrorism poses lesser challenge because backed by weak states

16. Shrewd national strategy
(accomplish beyond its actual power)
• Preventing costly challenges + Mobilizing other powers’ resources
• Deterrence
• Deterrence could be backed by asymmetrical response.
• Asymmetrical response involves:
• Choosing actions that draw on your strength and exploit the opponents
weakness
• Strategically overreaching rather than tailoring a proportional response
• Recruitment of collaborators
• Diplomacy of reassurance = to diminish the risk of counter-hegemonic balancing
because states balance against threat not against power
• It must avoid promoting narrow self-interest
• When possible, It must act multilaterally

17. Morality debate
• More than self-interest justifies the US global leadership
• Making the system work is the highest morality because the
alternative is chaos.
• Humankind in a state of war: solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and
short
• American power carries a moral burden: God make us strong to do your work
• Hybrid of the logics of Hegemonism and Liberalism (affirmative
promotion of freedom, not just preventing evils from happening)

18. Hegemonism in the US History
part 1: During cold war
• One of the world’s power after Spanish-American War (1898), acquisition of an empire in the Caribbean and in Asia
• The Covenant of the League of Nations did not ascribe to the US any special responsibility.
• 1930s: the midwife of hegemonic logic
• She did not take the responsibility, neither post-WW1, nor post-WW2
• Franklin Roosevelt sought to share leadership with Britain and the Soviet Union.
• Even before 1945,the USSR’s imposition of communit government in Poland created friction. By 1947, Britain impoverished
by the war. The US stood alone atop the pyramid.
• After 1947, Containment was the convergence of Realism (at first and then), Liberalism, and Hegemonism. This
convergence provided this policy’s dominance during the Cold War.
• Hegemonic logic influenced containment in 3 ways:
• The US sought to maintain a preponderance of power, not equivalence.
• Containing allies, like Germany and Japan, was integral to contraining the USSR.
• Containment as a global program, not just being focused on a few regions because of the domino theory, all regions are important.
• Since 1950 to 1970: Korea, Vietnam, Lebanon, Dominican Republic, Grenada
• Reagan era (1981-1989), a hybrid of Hegemonism and Liberalism: Spreading democracy and free trade

19. Hegemonism in History
• Since the late 1940s, Hegemonism has been the dominant foreign policy logic.
• Implosion of USSR:
• disappearing the main barrier to the US hegemony
• Lessen the danger of instability, weaken the plausibility of Hegemonism
• Rhetoric of Hegemonism: Persian Gulf, Bosnia, Kosovo
• George Bush (1989-1993): New World Order
• Bill Clinton (1993-2001): The Indispensable State
• Members of a project, called “New American Century”: Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld,
Wolfowitz
• 2002 state of the union address:
• By confronting evil and lawless regimes we do not create a problem, we reveal a
problem.

20. Further Discussion
• What factors would account for the gap between influence and control of the
US over resources? And would it negate the capacity and need for the US to
provide the world with leadership?
• Follow, oppose, or be free rider? Which of these options will the other major
powers be likely to adopt?
• Would the US be able to balance its commitment and its resources, or would it
be likely to overtax its resources?
• Is it likely to sacrifice short term self interest for the long term common
interest consistently?
• When Hegemonism is morally appropriate and when it is morally objectionable?
• Will a hegemonic foreign policy in the long run in the US political arena? What
aspects of this logic make it attractive to the American people and what aspects
produce opposition?

21. If you liked it, follow me on twitter @issa_adeli