That the United States is the most influential nation in the world is beyond dispute. The continued role the US will play in world affairs is, however, hotly contested, as those in favor of hegemony argue vehemently against those convinced that the pursuit of empire is not in AmericaÆs national interest. The reasons supporting each view are manifold and complex. In favor of the pursuit of empire are thinkers such as Robert Kagan and Sebastian Mallaby, who argue that the United Statesùand the rest of the worldùstand to benefit from a unipolar global configuration with America at the helm. Other political analysts such as William Pfaff, Lance Selfa and Lewis H. Lapham argue that the pursuit of empire is folly, and that history has shown the error in yielding to the hubris of hegemony. The question of empire no doubt looms large for the United States in the 21st century. How this question is decided will, to some extent, decide the fate of the world as we know it.
Robert Kagan advances a notion of ôbenevolent hegemonyö in defense of the behavior of the United States as a world superpower (26). On this view, the power wielded by the United States throughout the world has been, and will continue to be, ôgood for a vast portion of the worldÆs populationö (Kagan 26). Essentially, Kagan is insisting that the alternativeùa multipolar world boasting many loci of powerùwill yield more violence, strife, poverty and oppression than one in which a benevolent power is allowed to maintain order unencumbered. Thus, KaganÆs view is not merely that the pursuit of empire is in AmericaÆs national interest, but that an American Empire is in the best interest of the world. Underpinning this idea is the straightforward assertion that in a globalizing world, the United States cannot withdraw from the world stage, therefore, ôAmerican prosperity cannot occur in the absence of global prosperityà American freedom depends on the surviv...