Abroad, many believe that the country's actions don't square with its policy objectives, often breeding anti-Americanism abroad. For example, when the U.S. goes out to promote democracy across the globe -- a noble policy objective -- it frequently works against that aim. The U.S. doctrine that democracy can be promoted by force is simply wrong. Its part of this foreign policy which stands against its own national interest. It appears that U.S. strategists conduct policy from the assumption that friends and allies are simply disposable. Unilateralism is alienating many of the U.S.' friends.

U.S. foreign policy seems aimed at satisfying short-term objectives, rather than taking a long view. For example, U.S. support for Israel's attack on Lebanon severely damaged U.S. interests in the Middle East. Before Israel's invasion of Lebanon, the U.S. had praised Lebanon for its still fragile democratic efforts in a region not known for democracy. Now democracy in Lebanon has been set back by Israeli bombs.

U.S. allies had warned Israel about this, but were ignored. U.S. involvement in Iraq has also increased instability, ended many lives, and cost a lot of money. Furthermore, the collapsed state in Iraq has become fertile soil for the growth and export of terror abroad. Disgruntled allies are now less likely to provide troops for peacekeeping forces; likewise they might hold back finances to relieve conflict situations, especially when their advice was ignored.

Again with the explosive situation in Iran, many U.S. foreign policy strategists propose tough approaches like military action without considering the long term impact. This could alienate moderate support for America in the Middle East and lead to a wider regional conflict with catastrophic effects on U.S. interests.

In similar fashion, while the U.S. argues for free trade, it then refuses to open its trade barriers or reduce subsidies to its farmers. U.S. cotton industry receives huge subsidies. This destroys struggling West African cotton producers. But the U.S. demands these developing countries don't subsidize. Efforts such as these and to promote democracy in the developing world will ring hollow if, at the same time, official U.S. development aid is slashed.

In summary, imposing democracy by force in other countries will only backfire. U.S. interventions in Latin America caused the rise of regimes hostile to America. World citizens' vote for more local control of their economies. The problem for U.S. foreign policy is that unseating democratically elected governments -- even repellent ones -- without a clear international mandate, will not advance democracy. It could actually lead to a backlash against democracy and more anti-Americanism. Worse still, rising anti-Americanism may in the end harm the U.S.' own commercial and economic interests, not only by stalling businesses abroad, but back at home.