The
term foreign policy no
longer completely covers the nuances of international relations to which it owes
its existence. As a growing global community made up of multi-cultural nations,
the world today may still consist of separate and distinct nations; however,
with globalization and transnational relations spearheading common interests
among nations in certain regions in the globe, such as APEC, foreign policy
seems to be rapidly evolving toward creating a multi-national (as opposed to
foreign) policy which at times may run in conflict with a particular nation’s
vested interests.
Ordinarily,
the idea of foreign policy is to protect and advance the self-interest of a
nation vis-a-vis other nations. Cooperation and bi-lateral and multi-lateral
accords are entered into with the end in view of promoting those interests
while giving in to those of other nations’ interests
as much as possible. The delicate balance that many nations have to maintain
within the volatile political, social and economic milieu of the real world
cannot be sacrificed in favour of one or two nation’s imposing their will upon
others.
Foreign
relations, when they fail through diplomacy, may lead to violent conflicts and
wars. Here are basic concepts for nations to bear in mind when they come
together to discuss foreign policy matters:
1. Decision-making in
terms of foreign policy must always arise from the people’s will
A
nation’s constitution contains the will of a people. How leaders interpret and
implement those laws will vary according to their self-interests and political
orientation. No leader or nation is ever totally independent of other nation’s
political and economic influence. This reality already makes foreign policy an
exercise in futility, especially among small nations that are beholden to the
developed nations in terms of market-dependence and indebtedness.
What
the people can do is be vigilant about how their foreign policy-makers and
implementors pursue their nation’s interests in the global scene. A big part of
the challenges of making foreign policy is satisfying the people’s needs and
expectations in global relations who are the final beneficiaries or victims of
foreign policy.
2. Complete world
order is not foreseeable in a globe that has nations possessing conflicting and
self-oriented foreign policies
It
is almost close to impossible to expect even in the far future that a world
peace under a so-called New World Order that will be under a unified
international government will ever arise. The United Nations may come as the
one great crusader for this taunted World Order; however, with the hundreds of
nations that compose it, and its inability to readily resolve violent conflicts
throughout the world in recent years, we see how it will continue to fail to
referee the varying policies and behaviors of so many nations.
Some
nations, including the UN, may take the initiative to act as the world’s
policeman in resolving violent confrontations now and then. But as long as
there are nations whose foreign policies are totally unilateral and even
xenophobic and myopic, world order will not be easily established.
3. Regional cooperation
is an effective tool for uniting nations with common cultural, social,
political and economic interests.
ASEAN
has shown part of its role in establishing political, economic and cultural
cooperation in Southeast Asia. Eventually, when a common currency will have
been set up as it had been done in Europe; it will enhance the region’s ability
to act a dynamic player in global affairs. This is also an effective way to
counteract the overtly unilateral moves of China in connection with their
claims on certain islands which are clearly beyond its territorial limits.
Striking
a delicate balance between maintaining trade relations with the economic giant,
ASEAN nations continue to voice out their protest against the apparent
hegemonic tendencies of China, providing another challenge to US, Japan, South
Korea and other developed nations affected by the issue.
4. Systematizing
foreign policy through a theoretical framework is like dressing up a tiger as a
harmless kitten
Foreign
policy academics and researchers tend to believe that providing a scientific
framework or theory to describe and systematize foreign policy will provide a
clearer model for analyzing how nations behave in terms of international
relations. But that is like bringing the sun into the laboratory in order to
study how it really works. Or dressing up a tiger like a tame cat without
changing its wild unpredictable character within.
Foreign
policy will not escape the foundational ideas of Machiavelli or Sun Tzu or more
modern thinkers who have labored to make self-interest the prime motivation for
political and economic survival in the ancient world as well as in the present
milieu.
The
world has come a long way in establishing cooperation, harmony and peace on a
global scale. What we have is a tribute to the thinkers and workers who helped
and continue to maintain the balance in the world. And yet, we live with
jittery anticipation of what a wily rouge nation or several conspiring nations
who might one day tilt the world beyond its regular orbit around its axis, so
to speak.
The
best strategy for keeping world peace and harmony is not through scientific
research or trade relations or military action but through establishing common
values that reinforce nations’ heritage as human beings with common basic
interests and needs.
Ultimately,
there is no such thing as foreign as everything that we value (family,
heritage, honor, property and land) is a common denominator in every nation by
virtue of our birth, humanity and destiny. Foreign policy is largely an
artificial orientation that only divides and creates disharmony, in general. We
must work toward an encompassing international or global policy that benefits
us all equitably.
