{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.030032467532467532, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002435064935064935, 'mean_word_length': 5.116625310173697, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Dangers of Taming American Power

S the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, policy-makers and scholars attempting to fashion a grand strategy for U.S. foreign policy have struggled to reconcile competing objectives. On the one hand, grave dangers abound, especially potential nuclear proliferation to terrorist groups or rogue states. For the most part, these problems do not lend themselves to diplomatic solutions. Therefore the Bush administration’s response—a doctrine of preemptive or preventive war against states that harbor terrorists or pursue illicit nuclear weapons programs—was understandable. On the other hand, the past few years have revealed the limits of this strategy. The bungled occupation of Iraq has shown the difficulties inherent in the state-building projects that this strategy requires. Moreover, in reaction to Bush’s foreign policy, anti-Americanism has risen dramatically, especially in the Muslim world, and other states and nonstate actors have sought through various means to limit U.S. power. The latter problem is the subject of Stephen M. Walt’s book Taming American Power: The Global Response to U.S. Primacy, which is part political science text, part polemic against Bush’s foreign policy. Walt, the academic dean and Robert and Renée Belfer Professor of International Affairs at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government and a leading neorealist theorist of international relations, notes at the outset that the current level of U.S. power is historically unprecedented. Nevertheless, the United States is not a status quo power. Rather, it has sought to increase its influence, enhance its position versus rivals or potential rivals, expand democracy and human rights, and address specific security threats. The increasingly assertive foreign policy of the Bush years, Walt contends, has deepened already existing anti-American sentiments. Unless the United States recognizes the reasons for anti-Americanism, reassures the rest of the world that U.S. power will be used judiciously, and conducts a more “mature” foreign policy, the result could be an eventual decline of American power. Although Walt’s book is an astute examination of the ways that other states respond to U.S. primacy, his policy recommendations are too passive in addressing today’s threats. In a chapter called “The Roots of Resentment,” Walt argues that antiAmerican sentiments arise both because of what the United States is and