Indirect Rule in the American System

Indirect Rule in the American System

In a century, The United States has been maintained global hierarchies over other regions such as Western Europe, Western Hemisphere and Northwest Asia. Recently, it has gone further to establish the same hierarchies in the Middle East and more specifically the Persian Gulf. The Lake (2011) argument attributes the United State with the usage of hegemony powers to indirectly rule other nations. This well portrayed because it has been observable that the United States exercise its authority over other nations and later ends up interfering with the politics of the client countries (Hechter, 2009). PLAGIARIZED SAMPLE-ORDER YOUR PAPER NOW
The United States argues that by extending the international hierarchies on subordinate states it benefits them both politically and economically. However, studies indicate that this action has both intrastate and interstate distributional consequences for the regime types and domestic politics of the subordinate nations (Levi, 2009). For example, when the United States international hierarchies gains are large enough, the lower radar nations ends up adopting the policy preferences same as that of the United States. This is well illustrated in West Europe whereby since the end of World War the aspects of American democracy have been evident. This is indirectly ruling other nations.
On other side, if the international hierarchies are small to influence the subordinate nations and policy preferences of the nations are strong enough to outweigh them. The United States applies autocracy and the little benefits of the foreign policies through the governing elites to ensure that their interests are advanced. For example, over a century the United States has applied this approach over the Central America. Alternatively, this has been the same strategy being applied by America in the Middle East (Gerges, 2009). The America’s global hierarchies in the Middle East are too small and therefore citizens have always ended up preferring domestic policies to foreign policies. However, despite the position of the Middle East States, America has continued to extent its international hierarchies through sympathizing with the authoritarian rulers.
The author of this article has explained the informal imperialism of the United States based on three approaches (Lake, 2011). First, Metrocentric approach that focuses on the features of the dominant nation. Second, pericentric theories that emphasizes on the characteristics of the subordinate state. Third, systemic model that explains the competition between the dominant nations. The author goes further to opine that the ability of the dominant state to establish its international hierarchies in the subordinate state depends on its gains. The greater the gains of the international hierarchy the higher the degree of accepting, legitimizing and stabilizing the foreign policies in the subordinate state. However, the gains of American democracy in the Middle East do not supersede the Middle East nations domestic policies and therefore difficult to the international hierarchies in their system.
The dominance of the United Sates over the other states dates back in 1898 during Spanish –American war on the control of Caribbean (Lake, 2009b). The America war victory gained it a control over region by ensuring that the leaders who bought the American ideas were in power. However, this was not the case in Mexico because of the relation crisis that existed between it and America. To claim the dominance and get rid of the European colonial powers influence, America projected its control towards Europe and Asia. This was aimed to hinder the encroachment of the Europeans especially the United Kingdom from advancing its hegemony powers.
Lately, there has been increased extension of the international hierarchies in the Middle East. Since, 1993 the United Sates have been recruiting the subordinates in order to influence the activities in the region. The Middle East oil has been the main reason why America is more concerned with its affairs. For example, when OPEC established an embargo on the oil shipments to North America, America responded by increasing the oil prices and provided a lot of wealth to oil-producing nations. This action by the United States saw the mending of the freaky relationship that existed between America and Saudi Arabia. Again there was an establishment of new relationship with Iran. These two Middle East nations are just mere representations of how the United Sates increases its influences over subordinated states in order to exercise its control indirectly. PLAGIARIZED SAMPLE-ORDER YOUR PAPER NOW
Today, the influence of the United States in the Middle East has largely reduced. However, there are some of the Persian Gulf countries that are subordinates of the United States on economic terms. On the other side, the international security hierarchy of the United States have also been declining. The Israel backing of the Middle East States have greatly reduced the United States security hierarchies in the Middle East. In fact, only few sates in the Middle East are willing to sign security deals with the United States.


Gerges, F. A. (2009). The Far Enemy: Why Jihad Went Global. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hechter, M. (2009). Alien Rule and its Discontents. American Behavioral Scientist, 53(3), 289-310.
Lake, D. A. (2009b). Hierarchy in International Relations. Ithaca, NY, Cornell : University Press.
Lake, D. A. (2011). The Domestic Politics of International Hierarchy: Indirect Rule in the American System. San Diego : University of California.
Levi, M. (2009). Conceptualizing Legitimacy, Measuring Legitimate Beliefs. American Behavioral Scientist, 53(3), 354-375.

error: Content is protected !!