Neoconservatism and the New American Century

Abstract

Maria Ryan analyzes neoconservatives in the 1990s. According to her, neoconservatives’ main goal during these years was “no longer to contain communism, nor to ‘export’ democracy overseas but to ensure that the United States remained the single pole of power in every region of the world” (p. 2). She argues that unipolarism “constituted the new defining strategic and ideological touchstone for neoconservatism in the post–Cold War period” and that “‘neoconservatism’ and ‘unipolarism’ would become almost … synonymous” (ibid.). Ryan examines neoconservative perspectives on national missile defense, Iraq, Kosovo, and China. She concludes her book emphasizing that neoconservatives’ views “were firmly within the mainstream historical tradition of American foreign relations” (p. 189). However well written and well documented, Ryan’s book suffers from two main problems: one conceptual, the other empirical. First, Ryan does not define neoconservatism. With no definition her study becomes distorted. For her, the Heritage Foundation is a neoconservative think tank although not one dominated by neoconservatives in reality. The historical roots of Heritage are different from those of neoconservatives. Heritage is linked to the New Right activism of people such as Paul Weyrich, the organization’s cofounder, rather than intellectuals. For first-generation neoconservatives Heritage was extremely conservative and not composed of serious thinkers. The only member of the first generation that has participated in the organization is Midge Decter, who has been on its board of trustees since 1981. Second-generation neoconservatives have been more inclined to make strategic alliances with Heritage, primarily after George W. Bush assumed the presidency.