Fiscal difficulties shake American faith in hegemonic strategy....

Money makes the mare go was never as true as it is in these difficult times. The United States of America has spent substantial amount of time and money in containing communism and promoting democratic values and virtues of the free market. But after the end of bipolarity, American drive to expand democracy and globalization to other lands is running out of steam, largely for fiscal reasons.  The experts advise the USA to adopt a smart strategy and instead of senseless spending on National security Strategy, it should simply improve it. In the words of an article in Financial Times, “given fiscal difficulties, it (USA) also needs to rely on a better strategy, rather than simply spending more”. The paper says that for the past 70 years the US has sought to lead and expand an open, democratic international order.

During the cold war it promoted multilateralism in the west and waged a long struggle against the Soviet Union. Since 1991 it encouraged expansion of globalization and democracy, although in very different ways under President Bill Clinton and the two presidents Bush. This era of expansion is drawing to a close. China shows no signs of democratizing as it grows wealthier. The financial crisis has undermined the lure of open markets. And difficult wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have made Americans skeptical of nation building and promoting democracy. The pre-eminent question now for US policymakers is how to preserve the American-led international order amid a series of dramatic geopolitical changes. Can emerging powers, especially China, be accommodated without rendering useless the core tenets of the international order? Should the US be preparing to do more or less abroad as its relative power declines?

President Barrack Obama’s actions to maintain the current Pacific order are a step in the right direction, but he still lacks a strategic “roadmap”. His 2010 National Security Strategy of May 2010 which was largely driven by economic considerations looks out of date after the change of course in Asia. The key to America’s future security was to hinge on its ability to reinvent its rusting domestic economy. In contrast to Mr. Bush’s controversial first national security strategy (NSS) in 2002, which issued an aggressive call to prolong the US’s hegemony even by undertaking pre-emptive wars, Mr. Obama’s first take brings the US back to more traditional ways of conducting foreign policy. Perhaps the biggest difference with the Bush era is in its emphasis on US economic renewal.

It assumes that emerging powers want to become responsible stakeholders and offers no plan to deal with them if they don’t. The result is incoherence in US strategic thought which will ultimately create a dysfunctional foreign policy. The Obama administration should continue to engage emerging powers, but it now needs a new strategy of preservation to ensure the current international order can withstand external pressures and function effectively, even if a major power, such as China, decides to undermine it. To do this the US needs to build new geopolitical partnerships and alliances; Indonesia and India are good candidates.

It must seek European support for core principles of openness, including freedom of the seas, space and cyberspace, to be upheld even if China and others encroach upon them. It should give more influence to nations willing to take on greater responsibilities in tackling shared problems – including South Korea, and on certain issues Vietnam and Turkey – and pressure those who do not. Given fiscal difficulties, it also needs to rely on a better strategy, rather than simply spending more. As Giuseppe Tomasi di Lampedusa wrote in his novel The Leopard: “If we want things to stay as they are, things will have to change.”

Why panic over falling number of graduates? Oil and grease your printers....

Should a decline in the college completion rate ring any alarm bells for countries? They say such indicators are worrisome for country elders because it would threaten to undermine your economic competitiveness. There were times when USA was Number One in the world with her youth in the age bracket of 25-34 years possessing college degrees. Not any more; it had been relegated to 12^th position among 36 developed nations. So what is so worrisome about it? They say this growing education deficit is a threat to nation’s well-being and worse than current fiscal crisis. Can’t they print more degrees to improve the numbers? They will only have to oil and grease their printing presses. Americans are unfortunate for not having the kind of leaders Pakistan has otherwise for them, making both ends meet would have become a much more significant issue than falling numbers in education.

New York Times has published an interesting feature on America’s growing education deficit quoting President of the College Board as saying that,  “the growing education deficit is no less a threat to our nation’s long-term well-being than the current fiscal crisis.” Gaston Caperton, the president of the College Board, issued this warning at a meeting on Capitol Hill of education leaders and policy makers, where he released a report detailing the problem and recommending how to fix it. “To improve our college completion rates, we must think ‘P-16’ and improve education from preschool through higher education.” While access to college has been the major concern in recent decades, over the last year, college completion, too, has become a leading item on the national agenda.

Last July, President Obama announced the American Graduation Initiative, calling for five million more college graduates by 2020, to help the United States again lead the world in educational attainment. New York Times has reported that in May, Grant-makers for Education, an organization for those who make gifts to educational programs, convened a group of philanthropists and policy experts to talk about how to bolster college-completion rates. “We spend a fortune recruiting freshmen but forget to recruit sophomores,” Michael McPherson, president of the Spencer Foundation, said at the meeting.

In April, Melinda Gates gave a speech at the American Association of Community Colleges convention, urging community college officials to lead the way on college completion and pledging that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation would contribute up to $110 million to improve remedial programs, in an effort to increase graduation rates. “The stars are aligning in a way that gives me some hope,” said William Kirwan, chancellor of the University System of Maryland, who hosted the Washington discussion along with Mr. Caperton. “This is a problem that’s been around for too long. But now there’s beginning to emerge a focus of attention and activity that quite frankly we haven’t had till now.”

Mr. Kirwan said that the United States had fallen behind other countries over several decades. “We led the world in the 1980s, but we didn’t build from there,” he said. “If you look at people 60 and over, about 39-40 percent have college degrees, and if you look at young people, too, about 39-40 percent have college degrees. Meanwhile, other countries have passed us by.”

Canada now leads the world in educational attainment, with about 56 percent of its young adults having earned at least associate’s degrees in 2007, compared with only 40 percent of those in the United States. (The United States’ rate has since risen slightly.) While almost 70 percent of high school graduates in the United States enroll in college within two years of graduating, only about 57 percent of students who enroll in a bachelor’s degree program graduate within six years, and fewer than 25 percent of students who begin at a community college graduate with an associate’s degree within three years.

The problem is even worse for low-income students and minorities: only 30 percent of African-Americans ages 25-34, and less than 20 percent of Latinos in that age group, have an associate’s degree or higher. And students from the highest income families are almost eight times as likely as those from the lowest income families to earn a bachelor’s degree by age 24. The problem begins long before college, according to the report released Thursday.

“You can’t address college completion if you don’t do something about K-12 education,” Mr. Kirwan said.

The group’s first five recommendations all concern K-12 education, calling for more state-financed preschool programs, better high school and middle school college counseling, dropout prevention programs, an alignment with international curricular standards and improved teacher quality. College costs were also implicated, with recommendations for more need-based financial aid, and further efforts to keep college affordable.