Foreign Policy in Focus - A Think Tank Without Walls
Foreign Policy In Focus

FPIF Report

Just Security: Executive Summary

Foreign Policy In Focus | June 19, 2007

Editor: FPIF

printable PDF version

Email this page to a friend

Comment on this article

Foreign Policy In Focus

Current U.S. foreign policy is unjust and breeds insecurity for all. In seeking an alternative, we should not revive the failed policies of the past. Instead, we should chart a new relationship between the United States and the world.

Our common future faces daunting challenges. War, poverty, terrorism, loose nukes, and climate change make us all feel less secure than a decade ago. The Bush administration's foreign policy has brought U.S. popularity in the world to new lows. At home, it has generated widespread dissatisfaction across the political spectrum.

Such widespread public dissatisfaction offers an opportunity to transform the national conversation from the framework of fear that has prevailed since 9/11 to a broader response to global ills and injustices. The growing public awareness of the climate crisis, the need to address the Middle East in a comprehensive manner, the wasteful extravagance of military spending, the continued threat of nuclear proliferation and nuclear use, and the corrosive effects of global inequality have revealed the inadequacies not only of current U.S. foreign policy but the Democratic Party's 2006 "real security" doctrine as well.

With its emphasis on fighting wars, the Bush administration has insisted on focusing just on security. We must focus instead on a just security, because there can be no real security without justice. The United States should act as a global partner not a global boss. We must restore principles of fairness and equity into our international conduct.

This alternative foreign policy framework tells five different stories about our common future and the five principal challenges we face: climate change, global poverty, nuclear weapons, terrorism, and military conflict. We address five different sets of core misconceptions and offer five interconnected prescriptions for change. We then offer a Just Security budget that would cut roughly $213 billion from the president's current defense budget request and yet make the United States safer and more secure. The concluding chapter puts the challenges facing the United States in a larger historical context and offers an integrated Just Security program.

Our Just Security program calls for:

  • A reduction of $213 billion in U.S. military spending, or one-third of the total "defense" budget.
  • Dramatic cuts in U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals as a first step toward nuclear disarmament.
  • An international process under the auspices of the UN to secure a viable peace between Israel and Palestine.
  • A global carbon fee to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and generate funds to help countries transition to sustainable sources of energy.
  • A large-scale, global plan to train four million new health workers.

What distinguishes this report from many alternative foreign policy proposals is an integrated approach that avoids the twin perils of hard power and global disengagement. We propose seven principles to guide U.S. engagement with the international community.

The United States must advance rather than undermine international mechanisms and institutions. We should move from a unipolar system presided over by the United States to a secure, multipolar system that is held in place by a latticework of international institutions and laws.

We must support the rule of law, not the rule of the jungle. The United States should spend less time talking about the rule of law and more time practicing the rule of law—by upholding international agreements such as the Geneva Conventions, ratifying the core labor standards of the International Labor Organization, and supporting new international institutions such as the International Criminal Court.

We must lead by example, not by force. The United States is No. 1 in several dubious categories—most powerful nuclear arsenal, largest greenhouse gas emitter, leading arms exporter—so if we want to change the world we have to start by changing ourselves.

Global problems call for global solutions, but one size does not fit all. The world is a varied place and what works in one place for one problem may not work the same elsewhere.

We should support just policies abroad because they also encourage just policies at home. Global inequality, unregulated arms sales, and weakened international agreements and institutions are not just foreign policy issues. They have tremendous impact on the U.S. economy and the security of the population.

We need more public involvement in global affairs not less. We can't leave it to the experts to solve the world's problems because, in many cases, the experts got us into the jam in the first place. As those who live in this country, we must use democratic means to close the gap between what the polls say and what our leaders are doing.

Security is not just about the military. When we speak of security, we are talking about freedom from military conflicts and terrorist attacks. But we also believe that security involves access to sufficient food and shelter, good health care and good jobs, a clean environment and well-functioning, accountable political structures.

The civil rights movement, the women's movement, and the peace movement have all transformed U.S. society. As a result, we have become a more just society, a more diverse culture, a more international country. It is time to change our foreign policy so that it looks more like America and also reflects American traditions of justice.

Many of the ideas and proposals in this report have broad support among the American public. Majorities of Americans believe that no nations should possess nuclear weapons, reject the notion that military force should be used to promote democracy, and want immediate steps taken to halt global warming. What was once considered radical has now gained some political support in Washington. Several architects of the Cold War are now calling for nuclear disarmament. The climate change skeptics are rapidly turning Green. Prominent politicians no longer believe in a "global war on terrorism."

We need leaders and social movements that can translate this broad American appeal and this growing political support into an integrated program for American renewal. We believe that this program must be founded on the principles of just security laid out in this report. Only a just security will make us all feel more secure.

 

Subscribe to
World Beat

FPIF's weekly ezine


Support FPIF


Published by Foreign Policy In Focus (FPIF), a project of the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS, online at www.ips-dc.org). Copyright © 2008, Institute for Policy Studies.

Recommended citation:
"Just Security: Executive Summary" (Washington, DC: Foreign Policy In Focus, June 2007).

Web location:
http://fpif.org/fpiftxt/4317

Production Information:
Author(s): Foreign Policy In Focus
Editor(s): FPIF
Production: Chellee Chase-Saiz

Latest Comments & Conversation Area
Editor's Note: FPIF.org editors read and approve each comment. Comments are checked for content only; spelling and grammar errors are not corrected and comments that include vulgar language or libelous content are rejected.
 
Name David Laurence Date: Aug 06, 2007
Your proposal is a noble one indeed. We so desparately need resolution, but it is far out of reach. As long as the neocons have their powerful stranglehold on our congress and the media there will be little chance for change, notwithstanding a change in the White House. Unless, the people get behind a leader who has the courage and the backing to put down the powerful lobbies such as AIPAC and Lockheed, and make America understand the urgency and need for real change, then your proposal will mean little. Words are a good start, but we still need dynamic action to accomplish anything. Are you involved in the action necessary to enable your proposal to come to fruition?
Discussion for this article has been closed.
 
Contact FPIF's webmaster with inquiries regarding the functionality of this website.
Copyright © 2008, Institute for Policy Studies.
 

Support FPIF

You Might Also Like:

 

Related Mideast Coverage

The VP Debate: Exceptionalism vs. Liberal Internationalism
Oct 3, 2008

Interview with Naomi Shihab Nye
Sep 16, 2008

On the Brink of Peace in the Middle East?
Aug 21, 2008

Related Coverage of Military Issues

Biden's Foreign Policy 'Experience'
Sep 23, 2008

Executive Summary for 'A Unified Security Budget for the United States, Fiscal Year 2009.'
Sep 22, 2008

No Recession for Arms Sales
Sep 19, 2008

Related Coverage of Terrorism Issues

The Blame Game
Oct 11, 2006

Why Do They Hate US?
Sep 21, 2006

Bush on 9/11: Annotated
Sep 13, 2006