Although everyone has heard the catchy phrase, I think very few people know what the "new world order" stands for. Depending on who you talk to, definitions range from type of government structure to economic policy to leadership role in international affairs. It seems to me that the new world order has never been defined in concrete terms. Therefore, it has become a catch-all expression which encompasses many different ideas. I think the slogan is society's attempt to classify a wide range of recent events. Change seems to be the underlying factor that links all these ideas together.
             I believe the U.S. will continue to hold the world leadership role. I agreed with the point brought up in Chapter One, Selection One (p. 19) by John Makin. Basically, he said that the U.S. still has great absolute power even though power measured relative to other countries has seemed to decline. There was a power vacuum following World War II, so it seems logical that in the 50 or so years since then power would become more equally distributed. The fact that Japan and Germany have recovered from almost complete ruin doesn't mean that the U.S. is headed down a path of inevitable destruction. The citizens of the United States enjoy a very high standard of living and many freedoms that citizens elsewhere can only dream of. In Chapter One, Selection One, (p. 20) Alfred Balk points out various statistics which support this conclusion. The United States excels in high technology competitiveness, leads in research and development spending, and has a gross national product of $220 billion.
             As Samuel Huntington explains, (p. 22) the United States has unmatched power in three critical areas: multidimensional strength, an influence based on "structural position", and the fact that there is no other dominant power likely to emerge. Another important factor the U.S. has on its side is "an appeal beyond its borders". This appeal has been almost impossible to du...