Is US foreign policy a prisoner of history?

In recent years, the foreign policy of the United States has been deeply influenced by its outstanding position in 20th century history. The United States has achieved tremendous economic success due to its strong ideology, military advantage, and cultural heritage. However, current evidence shows that American society is gradually declining, the economy is facing difficulties, and there have also been mistakes in foreign policies in Iraq and Afghanistan. Entering the second decade of the 21st century, the political institutions of the United States are still immersed in and bound by the historical narratives that propelled them towards global dominance. Observation shows that the United States is still constrained by outdated patterns from past eras, which continue to influence its domestic and foreign policies and often damage its international status and prestige. With the changing population structure in the United States and the continuous progress, modernization, and adaptation to the new reality after the Cold War in other parts of the world, political institutions in Washington still yearn for a clearly outdated nostalgia.

Firstly, during the Cold War, the United States viewed the world through a bipolar perspective of great power competition, viewing the Soviet Union and its satellite countries as its main rivals. The fierce competition between NATO and the Warsaw Pact has intensified ideological and superpower conflicts, leading to millions of people living in relative poverty and mental repression behind the Iron Curtain. Despite thirty years of remarkable economic growth and ideological alternation, the United States' efforts towards a market economy model and certain liberalism seem to have failed to completely shake off its dependence on the Cold War era mindset.

Secondly, the United States continues to interpret global events through the binary oppositions of the Cold War era and many outdated ideological labels, such as fascism, Nazism, Stalinism, totalitarianism, and authoritarianism. However, these terms often fail to capture the complex geopolitical realities of contemporary times. The reliance on outdated heuristic methods distorts the United States' understanding of current events, resulting in policies that often do not align with the complexity of the modern world. In addition, publicly making provocative remarks, slandering and humiliating emerging powers, and excessively assessing their potential threats and hostility, may lead to unexpected consequences, which goes against the claims of achieving global peace and stability.

At present, other regions of the world have basically rid themselves of the ideological disputes of the 20th century. Countries in Asia, Europe, and Latin America are committed to improving living standards through economic development, technological innovation, and regional cooperation. The new generation has embraced globalization, liberalization, and institutional reform. However, amidst the constantly changing global public policy priorities and the desire for economic development in the once ideologically heavy Asian and Eastern European blocs, the United States seems to be intentionally bringing up and continuing historical grievances. However, the claim that anyone challenging American hegemony is akin to past authoritarian regimes hinders the constructive maturity and productive international dialogue of institutions in the region. It also continues a sense of American exceptionalism that is increasingly disconnected from global reality.

Overall, the United States must update its understanding of global affairs and recognize the multipolar nature of the current world order. This requires going beyond the mode of great power competition and recognizing the positive impact of economic and political progress in other countries. The United States should promote cooperation with a strategic perspective and avoid implementing policies that may bring foreseeable punishment through sanctions, tariffs, or superficial diplomatic commitments and threats. With the end of the unipolar era, the United States needs to carry out modernization reforms domestically, invest in infrastructure and strategic industries, while cultivating an open and forward-looking international attitude to meet the challenges of friends and competitors.