Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

New paradigms, old hierarchies? Problems and possibilities of US supremacy in a networked world

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Politics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As Obama took office at the beginning of 2009, several new figures attained important advisory positions in his administration. Anne-Marie Slaughter, former Dean of the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton University, and now Director of Policy Planning in the State Department, is a prime example of the ‘change’ that has come to Washington. In recent years she has been part of a growing academic circle that views networks at the centre of international relations. At the same time, she has promoted the idea that the United States can be ‘the most connected country’ in such a world. By taking a closer look into the discourse of US supremacy and the current state-of-the-art in the theory of transnational networks, this article reveals the divergence between wishful thinking and reality in Slaughter's position. By analysing her position and introducing three case studies, we conclude that the complexity of power relations in a world of networks makes any assumption of US supremacy highly problematic. Some might ‘mirror’ the beliefs and values of America (Open Society Institute); some might only be a ‘prism’ of various different voices (Al-Jazeera); and some might fall totally outside state control to form ‘shadow networks’ (Khan Network). Ultimately, it is the belief in US exceptionalism that perpetuates the claim that the United States has ‘an edge’ in such a world, with potentially problematic consequences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In response to Slaughter's standpoint, Michael Barnett remarked that because Americans are ‘infused with the hubris of exceptionalism’ they are ‘psychologically not capable of having this moment of honesty’ (International Herald Tribune, 23 May 2007). Rieff (2008, p. 108) adds that ‘normalcy – the idea that the United States is a nation like any other, with its strengths and weaknesses, virtues and defects … – does not stand much chance of appealing to many Americans, left or right’. As Slaughter rejected accusations of exceptionalism, Rieff (2008, p. 108) noted further that ‘her secular grafting of the old-time progress narrative onto the actual history of the United States only works so long as she touts a self-loving vision of the political and moral essence of the country’. Lee Marsden goes further by arguing that exceptionalism is deeply grounded in religious sentiments and therefore to a certain extent even inherent in America's identity (Marsden, 2008).

  2. Nordstrom originally coined this term to refer to international groups that provide public goods outside of the authority of the state, thereby building up their own local and regional legitimacy (for instance mafias or insurgent groups).

  3. On the difficulties for US public diplomacy to convey its message, see for instance Marc Lynch (2003, p. 87) who describes that the appearance of US officials ‘all too often … only confirms the viewer's worst stereotypes’. Similarly, Cherribi (2009) uses the example of Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy Karen Hughes's appearance on Al-Jazeera in 2005 to show that even a very eloquent performance might not lead to the expected (and desired) result.

  4. See the tracking of the Khan network as chronicled at www.historycommons.org/project.jsp?project=aq_khan_nuclear_network.

References

  • Armstrong, D. and Trento, J. (2007) America and the Islamic Bomb. Hanover, NH: Steerforth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arquilla, J. and Ronfeldt, D. (2001) The advent of netwar (revisited). In: J. Arquilla and D. Ronfeldt (eds.) Networks and Netwars: The Future of Terror, Crime, and Militancy. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauman, Z. (2002) Reconnaissance wars of the planetary frontierland. Theory, Culture and Society 19 (4): 81–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beck, U. (2000) What is Globalization? Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, U. (2002) The terrorist threat: World risk society revisited. Theory, Culture and Society 19 (4): 39–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R.H. (1976) Social theory as metaphor: On the logic of discovery for the sciences of conduct. Theory & Event 3 (2): 169–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burman, S. (2008) Necklace or noose? Challenges to American hegemony. Foresight 10 (4): 69–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, A.B. (2001/02) The architecture of government in the face of terrorism. International Security 26 (3): 5–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castells, M. (1996) The Rise of the Network Society, Vol. 1 of The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castells, M. (1999) Information Technology, Globalization and Social Development. Geneva: UNRISD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castells, M. (2000) Toward a sociology of the network society. Contemporary Sociology 29 (5): 693–699.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castells, M. (2004) Afterword: Why networks matter. In: H. McCarthy, P. Miller and P. Skidmore (eds.) Network Logic: Who Governs In an Interconnected World? London: Demos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castells, M. (2005) Global governance and global politics. PS: Political Science and Politics 38: 9–16.

  • Castells, M. (2007) Communication, power and counter-power in the network society. International Journal of Communication 1: 238–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castells, M. (2008) The new public sphere: Global civil society, communication networks, and global governance. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616: 78–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Catlaw, T. (2008) Governance and networks at the limits of representation. American Review of Public Administration 39: 478–498.

  • Cherribi, S. (2009) US public diplomacy in the Arab world: Responses to Al-Jazeera's interview with Karen Hughes. American Behavioral Scientist 52: 755–771.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, M. (2005) Empire by denial: The strange case of the United States. International Affairs 81 (1): 15–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deibert, R. and Stein, J. (2002) Hacking networks of terror. Dialog-IO 1 (1): 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, M. (2005) Transnational networks and new security threats. Cambridge Review of International Affairs 18 (1): 7–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grim, R. (2009) Al-Jazeera to broadcast in DC area. Huffington Post, 3 April, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/30/al-jazeera-to-broadcast-i_n_193604.html.

  • Grygiel, J. (2009) The power of statelessness. Policy Review 15, (April/May), http://www.hoover.org/publications/policyreview/41708942.html.

  • Guilhot, N. (2006) A network of influential friendships: The Fondation pout une Entraide Intellectuelle Euopeenne and East-West cultural dialogue, 1957–1991. Minerva 44: 379–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guilhot, N. (2007) Reforming the world: George Soros, global capitalism and the philanthropic management of social sciences. Critical Sociology 33: 447–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hafner-Burton, E., Kahler, M. and Montgomery, A. (2009) Network analysis for international relations. International Organization 63: 559–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardt, M. (2006) From imperialism to empire. The Nation, 31 July/7 August, pp. 26–29.

  • Hardt, M. and Negri, A. (2000) Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardt, M. and Negri, A. (2004) Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herman, E. and McChesney, R. (1997) The Global Media. London: Cassell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herz, J. (1957) Rise and demise of the territorial states. World Politics 9 (4): 473–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herz, J. (1968) The territorial state revisited: Reflections on the future of the nation-state. Polity 1 (1): 11–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Herald Tribune. (2007) American exceptionalism: Is there a moral high ground? 23 May.

  • Iskandar, A. (2005) Is Al-Jazeera alternative? Mainstreaming alterity and assimilating discourses of dissent. Transnational Broadcasting Studies Journal 15, http://www.tbsjournal.com/Archives/Fall05/Iskandar.html.

  • Kimball, D. (2009) Learning from the A.Q. Khan Affair, http://www.armscontrol.org/node/3543.

  • Knoke, D. (1990) Political Networks: The Structural Perspective, Structural Analysis in the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Levy, A. and Scott-Clark, C. (2007) Deception: Pakistan, the United States, and the Global Nuclear Weapons Conspiracy. London: Atlantic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, M. (2003) Taking Arabs seriously. Foreign Affairs 82 (5): 81–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maier, C.S. (2000) Consigning the twentieth century to history: Alternative narratives for the modern era. American Historical Review 105 (3): 807–831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maier, C.S. (2007) America among empires? Imperial analogues and imperial syndrome. GHI Bulletin 41: 26–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsden, L. (2008) For God's Sake: The Christian Right and US Foreign Policy. London: Zed Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, H. (2006) Al-Jazeera. London: Abacus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montague, B. (2008) Anti-war Soros funded Iraq study. Sunday Times, 13 January, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article3177653.ece.

  • Nordstrom, C. (2000) Shadows and sovereigns. Theory, Culture and Society 17 (4): 35–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Obama, B. (2007) The American moment: Remarks to the Chicago council on global affairs. 23 April, http://www.thechicagocouncil.org/dynamic_page.php?id=64.

  • Palan, R. (2003) The Offshore World. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rieff, D. (2008) Without exception: The same old song. World Affairs 170 (3): 101–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ronfeldt, D. and Arquilla, J. (2007) The promise of Noöpolitik. First Monday, 12 August.

  • Rosenau, J. (1999) States, Sovereignty, and Diplomacy in the Information Age. United States Institute of Peace. Virtual Diplomacy Initiative Reports, http://www.usip.org/virtualdiplomacy/publications/reports/jrosenauISA99.html.

  • Ruggie, J.G. (1993) Territoriality and beyond: Problematizing modernity in international relations. International Organization 47 (1): 139–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seib, P. (2005) Hegemonic no more: Western media, the rise of Al-Jazeera, and the influence of diverse voices. International Studies Review 7: 601–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seib, P. (2008) The Al-Jazeera Effect. Dulles, VA: Potomac Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, A.-M. (2004) A New World Order. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, A.-M. (2007) Reviving America's values. International Herald Tribune, 18 May.

  • Slaughter, A.-M. (2009) Americas edge. Foreign Affairs 88 (1): 94–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, A.-M. and Zaring, D. (2006) Networking goes international: An update. Annual Review of Law and Social Sciences 2: 211–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, T. (2007) A Pact with the Devil. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soros, G. (1998) Toward a global open society. The Atlantic Monthly 281 (1), January, http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/98jan/opensoc.htm.

  • Soros, G. (2003) The bubble of American supremacy. The Atlantic Monthly 292 (5), December, http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200312/soros.

  • Stanley Foundation. (2006) Open Media and Transitioning Societies in the Arab Middle East: Implications for US Security Policy. Muscatine, IA: Stanley Foundation.

  • Stone, D. (2008a) Global public policy, transnational policy communities, and their networks. Policy Studies Journal 36 (1): 19–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, D. (2008b) Transnational Philanthropy, Policy Transfer Networks and the Open Society Institute. GARNET Working Paper no. 41/08, April, http://www.garnet-eu.org/fileadmin/documents/working_papers/4108.pdf.

  • Tenet, G. (2007) At the Center of the Storm: My Years in the CIA. New York: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • US Department of State (n.d) Policy Planning, http://www.state.gov/s/p/.

  • Waltz, K. (1979) Theory of International Politics. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, L. (2005) Turning a blind eye again? The Khan network's history and lessons for US policy. Arms Control Today March, http://www.historycommons.org/project.jsp?project=aq_khan_nuclear_network.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of History, Leiden University, Johan Huizingagebouw, Doelensteeg 16, Leiden, 2311, VL, The Netherlands

    Giles Scott-Smith

  2. Graduate Student, Politics and International Studies (POLIS), Cambridge University, UK

    Moritz Baumgärtel

Authors
  1. Giles Scott-Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Moritz Baumgärtel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Scott-Smith, G., Baumgärtel, M. New paradigms, old hierarchies? Problems and possibilities of US supremacy in a networked world. Int Polit 48, 271–289 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1057/ip.2011.3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/ip.2011.3

Keywords

Search

Navigation