At 250 years old, there are many ways to think about the United States’ standing in the world. One could focus on its exceptional aspects, its self-regard as a nation not bound by international laws and norms. Or one could highlight the country’s store of soft power that has often contributed to its image as a “city on a hill,” a guiding light for all other nations.
But it would only be fair to point out that the U.S. has long been a bit of a bully on the world stage, a dangerous nation that uses its power to extract concessions from other states in exchange for its protection and access to its markets. Or one could highlight the times that the United States has failed to live up to the ideals upon which the nation was founded, such as the equality of all people and the principle of welcoming the downtrodden.
The United States’ semiquincentennial is also a good occasion to reflect on the general direction of the country’s foreign policy since its founding. Walter Russell Mead referred to the various “schools of thought” of U.S. foreign policy, ranging from Jacksonian isolationism to Rooseveltian internationalism. But George C. Herring has argued that Washington has not, in fact, fluctuated between isolationism and internationalism, but has been consistently unilateralist: a nation that engages with the world, but usually and almost uniquely on its own terms. And then there is the view, well expressed by the political scientists Robert Keohane and Ira Katznelson, that the United States was a nation primarily shaped by trade and war.