Since 1945, the United States has pursued its global interests through creating and maintaining international economic institutions, bilateral and regional security organizations, and liberal political norms; these ordering mechanisms are often collectively referred to as the international order. This report examines options for future U.S. policies with respect to the order.

Alternative Options for U.S. Policy Toward the International Order

Michael J. Mazarr, Miranda Priebe, Andrew Radin, Astrid Stuth Cevallos

ResearchPublished Aug 28, 2017

Since 1945, the United States has pursued its global interests through creating and maintaining international economic institutions, bilateral and regional security organizations, and liberal political norms; these ordering mechanisms are often collectively referred to as the international order. In recent years, rising powers have begun to challenge aspects of this order.

This report examines options for future U.S. policies with respect to the order. To do so, it distills ongoing debates about the U.S. role in the world and identifies four strategic visions of order that the United States could pursue. These visions differ primarily in the characteristics of the rules of the order: who makes the rules and how binding those rules are on state behavior. The report then considers the fundamental assumptions that would motivate a U.S. choice between these alternatives, and it concludes by outlining policies that the United States would need to pursue to promote each vision of order.

Key Findings

Alternative Visions of Order Present Different Strengths, Weaknesses

  • Each of the prospective orders has specific implications for economic and defense policy.
  • An outright coalition against revisionism has significantly distinct implications from each of the other possible orders.
  • An order's character will likely flow from its strategy for achieving great-power peace.
  • No single order offers the United States the ability to place equal value on all four goals of order.
  • Preferences of other states will affect the viability of each vision.
  • Coherent views about the international order can strengthen U.S. policy — but only so long as different strands of U.S. foreign policy are consistent with the desired vision of order.

Order a Print Copy

Format
Paperback
Page count
130 pages
List Price
$18.50
Buy link
Add to Cart

Topics

Document Details

  • Copyright: RAND Corporation
  • Availability: Available
  • Year: 2017
  • Print Format: Paperback
  • Paperback Pages: 130
  • Paperback Price: $18.50
  • Paperback ISBN/EAN: 978-0-8330-9833-7
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.7249/RR2011
  • Document Number: RR-2011-OSD

Citation

RAND Style Manual
Mazarr, Michael J., Miranda Priebe, Andrew Radin, and Astrid Stuth Cevallos, Alternative Options for U.S. Policy Toward the International Order, RAND Corporation, RR-2011-OSD, 2017. As of September 15, 2024: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2011.html
Chicago Manual of Style
Mazarr, Michael J., Miranda Priebe, Andrew Radin, and Astrid Stuth Cevallos, Alternative Options for U.S. Policy Toward the International Order. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2017. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2011.html. Also available in print form.
BibTeX RIS

Research conducted by

This research was sponsored by the Office of Net Assessment in the Office of the Secretary of Defense and conducted within the International Security and Defense Policy Center of the RAND National Defense Research Institute, a federally funded research and development center sponsored by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, the Unified Combatant Commands, the Navy, the Marine Corps, the defense agencies, and the defense Intelligence Community.

This publication is part of the RAND research report series. Research reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND research reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.