No one vaguely familiar with liberal foreign policy analysis could fail to ponder the possibility of an expanding liberal zone of peace. Since Minister Priya Manickchand’s, unfortunate, 4th of July statement there has been much theorizing about the zeal for the spread of democracy among Western diplomats. I have argued before that in the case of the United States of America, this is rooted in a long tradition (“Lead without leadership,” SN: 14/05/2014). But it also appears to me that much of the democratic evangelizing that today exists in some Western foreign policy circles has to do essentially with their own national security concerns.
In his most recent foreign policy address to graduates at West Point (US Military Academy), President Barack Obama said that the United States must always lead on the world stage and proceeded to outline a vision for the United States that contains four main elements. “Using military force when our core interests are at stake or our people are threatened; shifting our counter-terrorism strategy by more effectively partnering with countries where terrorist networks seek a foothold; continuing to strengthen and enforce international order through evolving our institutions, such as NATO and the United Nations; supporting democracy and human rights around the globe, not only as a matter of idealism, but one of national security” (“America Must Always Lead”: President Obama Addresses West Point Graduates” 28/05/2014, http://www.whitehouse.gov/).
In a 2005 book entitled “Breaking the Real Axis of Evil: How to Oust the World’s Last Dictators by 2025,” Mark Palmer, a democracy activist and former US ambassador to Hungary and speech-writer to President Ronald Reagan, called for a global strategy to rid the world of the remaining forty-five autocratic regimes. He would give Obama’s fourth
