Does the United States apply the same geopolitical strategy as the United Kingdom of past centuries?

Question

I'm not going to go into the question in depth, but if I had to summarize what England's geopolitical strategy was at the time of its glory, I could summarize it in two main points.

1) Maintain the balance of power in Europe, to prevent a power from becoming hegemonic which would threaten English interests. (in this, the current territory of Belgium, represent a vital stake, for economic reasons and because England could have been threatened with invasion)

2) As soon as a nation became too powerful, England managed to create alliances that surrounded the nation that had become too threatening, and thus created a coalition against it, to bring it back to reasonable limits, and thus restore the balance. As a Frenchwoman, I hate this balance 🤣

I find that we are quite close to what the United States is doing, which is trying to maintain a balance of power, and which, as we can see Today with China, is creating alliances in Asia to counterbalance the power Chinese.

The big difference is that today, nuclear energy exists and therefore a military confrontation is unlikely, but certainly not impossible. While at the time of English power, political problems ended up being settled in the majority of cases by war. the alliances forged, necessarily creating a military coalition which made it possible to restore this balance.

Does the United States apply the same geopolitical strategy as the United Kingdom of past centuries?

NamerOfStars · Accepted Answer

Kinda. I'd say the US *did* try to fill the same political niche as the world's policeman that the UK did, but in a different way; our empire is far more commercial than military. This unfortunately blinds many Americans to the atrocities OUR government commits; they're seen as "an unfortunate requirement" at worst. The other day, I saw an image on the phone of a guy standing in line in front of me: a line of people are standing on a scaffold with ropes around their necks. One of them, labeled "Russian war protesters" is sobbing, and saying "I'm never been so ashamed to be Russian". Another, who's almost smiling, labeled "American war protesters", says "First time?". That's kind of how it feels, being a critic of immoral government actions without being an outright oikophobe.

And as a side note, I'll point out that the French perspective is a little skewed on the issue of nuclear power: the US has had a MASSIVE campaign waged against it for decades, and is far more scared of it than you folks are. A lot of Americans, and probably in America-influenced countries, regard it as a source of revulsion and fear, instead of as the way out of fossil fuel consumption.

MrtoddsWildRide · Accepted Answer

Here is the thing that other countries do not ever seem to understand about US foreign policy, It's not really well thought out in a long term way. Every four or eight years we get a new President and a new agenda. There are entrenched people in the bureaucracy that will try to influence the leaders and urge them to stay the course, but in some thing, foreign policy in particular, the leaders ignore them. They got elected often on what the last guy did that the people didn't like and often how well we get along with other countries is a big factor so they are going to try reversing that direction.

Anonymous · Accepted Answer

in my opinion, the United States is most definitely an Empire. A chip off the old block one might say — given its origins, and thirst for domination. It has, however, learned valuable lessons from its mother’s mistakes. Why take control of huge global land mass when you can control the financial workings of the globe? Why subject the world’s populations to your will by expensive military might when you can control your empire from an office high up in a Manhattan High-Rise building? Why not weaken your friends and potential foes by buying up their ‘family silver and such’ with a fist full of dollars? The United States, on the few military forages since the 1950’s has found, that even with its overwhelming military might, old fashioned methods of empire building are just not worth it in modern times. The new-age imperialists see domination in monetary terms as being far better than a global military adventure that can easily back-fire — and the Chinese know that! So, is the American empire to be long-lived like the Roman or British empires, or will it burn brightly for a short while before giving up to become yesterday’s man?

Bratsondanielle · Accepted Answer

Lol comparing the United States greatest country in the world to England is bullocks lol. We're way more advanced and we don't chuck pints and smoke tobacco and talk like retarded

Baredog69 · Answer

Contrary to what I would say a majority of the people believe that Russia is our biggest threat they could not be more wrong. China is by far our worst adversary in all levels whether it be militarily economically or strategically. One thing for instance America being politically correct and trying to save the world which it cannot do with going electric on vehicles solar panels and stealth aircraft. Meanwhile China is buying up most if not all of the lithium mines throughout the world needed for those electric car batteries they possess a large majority of the world's rare Earth minerals needed to make our stealth aircraft and other war machines. China will defeat us and never fire a shot in my opinion.

RealMarek · Answer

There are some similarities. The British were far more effective administrators of their territories. The US makes a pretense of not having an empire, so outsources administration to dictators or corrupt puppet democracies like the ones it installed in Ukraine or Afghanistan.

jshm2 · Answer

You're wrong of course.

The British Crown and British Empire had separate goals and sometimes they met.

The American empire more closely follows the strategies of the Hapsburg Empire but to a bigger scale.

WonderlandGone · Answer

In some aspects sure, but those that apply also apply to a number of other former-colonial nations. Modern politics is much different than in the past and the stance of the US reflects that, but the parallels are there.

greenice27 · Answer

The United States has suffered the Vietnam syndrome and is not keen on the post-1975 wars. However, the British Empire was able to recruit soldiers from its colonies and make them fight. Apart from this difference, their strategies are the same.

ragooo8 · Answer

Yes but in a smarter way.

Iron_Man · Answer

Sorry no

Soskaci · Answer

no special

Does the United States apply the same geopolitical strategy as the United Kingdom of past centuries?

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

Does the United States apply the same geopolitical strategy as the United Kingdom of past centuries?

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

We're glad to see you liked this post.