A New Anti-American Coalition

By Jeremy Ghez, Theodore W. Karasik, and Brian Nichiporuk

Jeremy Ghez is a doctoral fellow at the Pardee RAND Graduate School. Theodore Karasik is a former RAND political scientist. Brian Nichiporuk is a RAND political scientist whose work focuses on international security and terrorism.

National security experts tend to agree that al Qaeda and China will be America’s greatest security threats in the decades to come. However, the loosely connected “global rejectionist front” made up of Russia, Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Belarus, and elements of the European far left could be emerging as a direct counter to American global interests.

This improbable group does not play geopolitics in its traditional form. It aims to discredit American doctrines of free markets, globalization, and liberal democracy. Its ideology is an eclectic mix of authoritarian capitalism, as in Vladimir Putin’s and Dmitry Medvedev’s Russia; populist socialism, such as Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela; and the anti-imperialism of the European far left and radical Shia Muslims.

The members have forged their coalition with anti-American rhetoric, a coercive use of oil and natural gas shipments, and deterrence through asymmetric warfare capabilities. Key proponents like Chavez have used the U.S. invasion of Iraq and its war in Afghanistan to cement ties among coalition partners. Social forums in Latin America and Europe, designed to counter events such as the World Economic Forum, have helped them debate and refine their intellectual counter-ideals and take an active stance on international issues.

If this global rejectionist front transcends religious, cultural, and hemispheric barriers and sustains its alliance, it could undermine U.S. interests on several levels. First, it could challenge American initiatives and values in international forums like the United Nations and the Organization of American States. Second, it could use its control over abundant energy resources to further drive up oil prices and to slow U.S. economic growth. Third, it could erode U.S. ideological influence in Latin America, the former Soviet Union, and Europe.

AP IMAGES/MIRAFLORES PRESS  Nicaragua’s President Daniel Ortega, Cuba’s Vice President Carlos Lage, Dominica’s Foreign Minister Roosevelt Skerrit, Venezuela’s President Hugo Chavez, and Bolivia’s President Evo Morales join hands at a medical school in Caracas, Venezuela, on January 26, 2008. Chavez was hosting the ALBA summit. ALBA stands for Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas, a regional trade alliance intended to be an alternative to U.S.-backed free-trade deals.

To counter such strategies, the next U.S. president should weaken the rejectionist front before it seriously threatens U.S. interests. One opportunity is to provoke defections by creating fault lines within the group. The United States could induce Syria’s defection, for example, by offering economic aid, a free-trade pact with the United States, and intelligence support for Syria’s domestic anti-Islamist campaign.

The United States could deepen relations with friendly European, Latin American, and Middle Eastern states, political parties, nongovernmental organizations, and civil-society groups, with the goal of reducing the rejectionist front’s clout. It could also address the concerns of those people in the coalition states who do not necessarily share their leaders’ hostility toward America and who could become a force for domestic reform if supported by appropriate American public diplomacy campaigns.

The convergence of these states and groups around an anti-American, anti–free market ideology is empowering the rejectionist front in the promotion of its agenda. If the next American president does not recognize and counteract such a threat, the growing influence of this alliance could obstruct a wide range of U.S. diplomatic initiatives, harm the U.S. economy, and reduce U.S. influence around the world.