Volume 22, Number 3, 1991

EN:

This article seeks to outline the complex pattern of liberty and national security in international relations through a survey of the historical relationship between those concerns in the foreign policy of what is still the world's most important democratic country, the United States. This study is not a history per se of American diplomacy concerning this cluster of issues, although it is historical in approach. Nor is it directly concerned with an on-going theoretical debate over whether or not democracies are inherently more peaceful than other types of states, despite drawing upon elements of that debate and having implications for it. Instead, what is presented here is an interpretive survey of the importance in U.S. foreign policy of a set of key ideas about international order — specifically, the attempt to resolve ideas of "American mission " with the requirements of security, through increasingly active linkage of U.S. national security to the internal character of foreign regimes. It then explores how that tension became manifest in two policy settings : the United Nations, one of America's major multilateral relationship s, and the Soviet Union, its principal bilateral relationship. In short, this study is concerned with governing ideas in American diplomacy; with how such ideas arise and are sustained or challenged; with how they have been disseminated among allies (and even adversaries) ; and the implications of the reality that the United States have succeeded in imbedding these notions in the structures of the international System. The essay concludes with what should prove a controversial, qualified approval of the new 'liberal realism' evident in American foreign policy in the early 1990s.

EN:

John Foster Dulles, then Secretary of State under the presidency of Eisenhower, once said there are two ways to conquer: by the clash of arms or through the economic control. The motto of the former WWII British SBS Commandos (Special Boat Service)used to be "United we conquer" and the one from the SAS (Special Air Service) used to be "Who dare win ", both of these commando troops or irregulars were in tactical competition framed by strategic cooperation where the light forces overcame heavier and overnumbering forces. Unity and daringness seem to be their secret weapon, but neither so secret nor so exclusive, comparatively to the recipe of tactical competition framed by strategic co-operation and coordination. "Superior numbers on the battlefield are an undoubted advantage, but skill, better organization, and training, and above all a firmer determination in all ranks to conquer at any cost, are the chief factors of success. Half-hearted measures never attain success in war and lack of determination is the most fruitful source of defeat" wrote Anthony Wilden¹. The Chinese "Chii" (close to the latin "anima": heart, mind, courage) may be translated to "determination" and not by "energy" as it uses to be with the western obsession and compulsion of matter, energy and big power at the expense of high determination or "Tai Chi". The Chinese "Lii" - though its primal senses are "Law", "Rationality" and "Reason", "Rite" and "Harmony" - may be viewed as "Skill". Here, Asia is the Far East and mainly Japan, the "mother tiger" and her "baby tigers ", namely Korea (South), Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan. The ride of the dragon is oriented elsewhere and devastated Viet Nam (the smaller dragon) - by its independence wars and communist insulation and isolation - is not yet in the game. Strategy is both an organizational level of action and a type of action based on disguise, deception, uncertainty, flexibility and adaptation.