It reveals the inner workings of a superpower that is wavering.
A minimal introduction to the United States!

The United States, a superpower that influences the world order.
The United States is South Korea's closest ally, but it is not easy to understand its choices and actions in the context of the Northeast Asian order or international diplomacy.
This book is a basic guide to understanding America's intentions and diplomatic strategies from a Korean perspective.

How did the United States rise to the ranks of the "celestial powers"? How did the United States choose a divine move at every crucial moment? Why does the United States favor Japan? Why does the United States wage war so often? The author, who has covered international diplomacy and security for JTBC for over 20 years, starts with these questions and explains, in an easy-to-understand manner with a journalism sense, the process by which the United States, a new nation with a short history of less than 250 years, secured the status of a superpower that commands the world, and the United States' strategy for the current international order.

The author addresses questions that anyone would have wondered about at least once, covering a wide range of topics, including American politics, history, culture, institutions, and international relations, in a light-hearted style.
In the near future, by watching to see who will be elected in the US presidential election this coming November, you can understand the unique American electoral system and the consciousness of the American people who are crazy about Trump. In the more distant future, you can learn about the unique values ​​of the United States from various angles, such as the process of expanding fertile territory after independence, the reason for the constant wars around the world after World War II, and the frontier spirit.

Until the late 1700s, it was unthinkable for rulers to have term limits.
It is no wonder that George III in the musical wonders, “Do you plan to keep changing leaders?”
Was it only the British king who did this?
At the time, most Americans would have thought that Washington would reign as a king called 'President.'
But Washington proved that the very essence of the presidency is to clearly define the limits of elected power by limiting the term of office itself.

--- p.28

In particular, when asked about the appropriate level of government intervention through election surveys in the United States, the American public's perception is much closer to the conservatives, with a 35 to 65 split between progressives and conservatives.
However, macroeconomic policy is more progressive, with a 60-40 split between progressive and conservative, education policy is 70-30, and environmental policy is 75-25.
Ultimately, the average American can be said to be conservative on an abstract level and progressive on a concrete policy level.
The Republican and Democratic parties have been attacking each point based on this.
--- p.35

For Koreans, the word 'border' conjures up images of separation.
Because of the division of North and South Korea, it is impossible to even approach, let alone cross the border.
For Americans, on the other hand, borders mean the opposite.
Throughout American history, borders have been largely open spaces rather than closed boundaries.
After settling in the New World, as the land continued to expand, the border became not the end of the country but a new starting point, and not the periphery but the center of dynamism.

--- p.60

If it weren't for Hamilton, America might have remained an agricultural nation rather than the capitalist power it is today.
At best, it would be comparable to an advanced agricultural country, such as Denmark, which has a large land area.
Even in the early days of the nation's founding, there were two opposing camps over the future development path of the new nation of the United States.
There are two groups: those who advocate industrial modernization and those who aim for an agricultural society based on slavery.
--- p.74

After the Civil War, the American economy grew by leaps and bounds at a rate that "astounded statistics."
From 1865 to 1895, the United States achieved an economic growth rate unprecedented not only in American history but also in the history of global capitalism.
From 1961 to 1981, when our country achieved the 'Miracle on the Han River,' the average annual economic growth rate for 20 years was approximately 10 percent.
Germany's 'Miracle on the Rhine' also peaked at 8 percent growth in the 1950s.
However, during the 30 years immediately following the Civil War, the U.S. economic growth rate averaged a whopping 15 percent per year, an unprecedented record in world history.
--- p.78

There have been five instances of a candidate winning the national popular vote but losing in the Electoral College, including the 2000 election.
Andrew Jackson in 1824, Samuel Tilden in 1876, and Stephen Grover Cleveland in 1888 were all caught up in this institutional contradiction.
The most recent unfortunate protagonist is Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election.
Hillary Clinton received about 3 million more votes than Trump, but lost by a whopping 74 electoral votes.

--- p.94

In fact, according to an analysis of 2020 exit polls by The Washington Post and Edison Research, Biden led Trump 55-57 percent to 42-44 percent among households with incomes under $100,000, but Trump won 54 percent to Biden's 42 percent among households with incomes over $100,000.
Trump is no longer just a hero for low-income whites; he has also completely absorbed the middle-class and wealthy, the traditional mainstream Republican supporters.
It is a political power that is close to a miracle.

--- p.105

So when Biden defeated Trump and reclaimed the White House in November 2020, the international community was relieved.
It was so moving when he said at the inauguration that “America is back.”
They thought that this would bridge the gap in alliances created during the Trump era, relieve some of the anxiety, and return to the previous international order.
However, while Biden reversed many of his predecessor's policies, he left the "America First" foreign policy fundamentals largely untouched.
--- p.126

In fact, a 2016 Pew Research Center poll found that 57 percent of Americans said the U.S. government should focus on domestic issues and leave other countries to solve their own problems.
Fifteen years ago, only 30 percent of Americans thought this way.
Only 27 percent of respondents said the United States needed to play a greater role in solving international issues.
Americans living in the 2000s do not want an America that is "broad-minded," but rather an America that "treats its own citizens well."

--- p.131

But somehow, the times of peace when America has stopped fighting wars like now feel strange.
Because the United States has been at war for about a quarter of its entire history.
If we narrow it down to half the period since World War II, and then narrow it down to the 21st century, we've been at war almost every day.
In fact, since this was a country where war was a daily occurrence, it is impossible to know whether this is an interwar period leading up to another war or a permanent period of truce.

--- p.135

As the era of war ended, America found itself mired in a full-blown war.
Since the end of World War II on September 2, 1945, the period of war has lasted for 78 years, reaching a whopping 57%, or 44 years (Korean War 1950-1953, Vietnam War 1955-1975, Gulf War 1990-1991, Afghanistan War 2001-2021).
It's like fighting a war once every two years.
The end of World War II brought with it the irony of America's war becoming more intense.

--- p.141

Ultimately, as the historical mission to spread American values ​​deepened, the frequency of wars increased, which in turn resulted in the loss of life and freedom for humankind around the world.
It makes no sense to suppress freedom in a war to protect freedom and human rights, as if you love your children too much and beat and abuse them.

--- p.149

In reality, the United States is closer to an empire.
For over half a century, we have sent American troops to every corner of the globe, making the American liberal order the international standard.
Among the permanent members of the UN Security Council, the United States is the only one that uses the name of its administrative organization dealing with other countries as State Department rather than Diplomacy or Foreign Affairs.

--- p.154

If you only know the 'Thucydides Trap', you could literally fall into a trap when predicting the US-China hegemony struggle.
There is a similar but different trap that exists like an Iranian twin: the Kindleberger Trap.
In short, the view is that if a rapidly rising emerging power has no will to assume the position of a hegemon while the existing hegemon's capabilities are insufficient, the international system will become unstable.
--- p.179

Why do totalitarian regimes fall into the American trap?
As Kennan had already observed about the nature of the Soviet Union, the nature of a totalitarian state is such that it judges American politics and culture through the lens of its own distorted ideology.
In other words, there is an analysis that this is due to the tendency to perceive the diversity, social progress, and political polarization of the liberal system as decline rather than regeneration.

--- p.181

From then on, it was a series of events.
The United States supported Hussein of Iraq to check Iran, which led to the Iran-Iraq War. When Hussein, exhausted from the eight-year war, invaded Kuwait with the intention of fighting a war of attrition, the United States started the Gulf War.
The Gulf War gave birth to Osama bin Laden in Saudi Arabia, which led to the 9/11 attacks, and 9/11 in turn led to the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
This in turn gave birth to the Islamic State (IS), which in turn led the United States to become involved in the Syrian civil war.
--- p.188

America's feelings toward China may be one of insult.
China, which we trusted, is now constantly challenging the international order created by the United States, tarnishing America's reputation.
The United States, which has been pushing China to survive to this extent, must feel betrayed.
Even if the United States is the "most powerful hegemon in human history," if it is tarnished, it will be difficult to maintain a stable international order.
If Oya says that someone made a mistake, then the person who made a mistake has to come forward even if he or she did not make a mistake.
Whether China really made a mistake or not is not a big variable.
That stage has already been passed.
--- p.198

Then, as the war on terrorism in the Middle East reached a standstill, the Obama administration turned its attention to China in earnest.
The change in policy toward China is generally considered to have begun around 2011, in the middle of the first term of the Obama administration.
In October of that year, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton contributed an article titled “America’s Pacific Century” to the foreign affairs magazine Foreign Policy.
“Over the past decade, America’s foreign policy has shifted from addressing the post-Cold War peace dividend to fulfilling our commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan,” Hillary said. “Now that those wars are over, we must accelerate our efforts to pivot to a new international reality.”
The so-called 'return to Asia' strategy was announced.

--- p.208

Sullivan, while pursuing derisking, set three conditions: diversifying the supply chain for core technologies such as semiconductors, limiting the transfer of advanced military and security technologies to China, and prioritizing the development of American industries.
The areas covered here are exempt from derisking.
However, if we start to consider the specific applicability, the list of exceptions is bound to grow.
Because of this, it feels like a divorce deferral memorandum of understanding that says, “We won’t break up as long as certain conditions are met.”

--- p.223

Jin Changrong, vice-dean of the School of International Relations at Renmin University of China, diagnosed that the Soviet Union, Germany, and Japan, which challenged American hegemony, all fell short of 70 percent of the US GDP and dropped out of the systemic competition.
However, China has already surpassed 70 percent of the U.S. GDP and is projected to catch up by 2025.
China is confident that it is taking a different path from the Soviet Union, Germany, and Japan.


China's goal is to become a prosperous, powerful, modern socialist nation by 2049, the 100th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China, and to become a global hegemon that can rival the United States.
This is the Chinese dream.

--- p.226

Biden, perhaps feeling regretful that he was not able to participate in the actual "historic reconciliation" between Seoul and Tokyo, invited the leaders of South Korea and Japan to Camp David, the U.S. presidential retreat, on August 18 of that year.
While we're at it, we've set the stage for transforming the security cooperation structure, currently divided into the ROK-US alliance and the US-Japan alliance, with the US in the middle, into a single ROK-US-Japan triangular cooperation body.
Biden, smiling brightly while walking with the leaders of South Korea and Japan without a tie in the middle of the street, may have been mumbling to himself, "South Korea, America, Japan, South Korea, America, Japan~"
Because if we do well, a long-standing problem of 70 years may be resolved.
--- p.247

Expanding the alliance network could integrate U.S. military assets, achieving economies of scale and reducing the burden on the U.S. defense budget.
Moreover, it will give Japan more discretion and relatively lessen the strategic burden on the United States.
Furthermore, the trilateral structure between South Korea, the US, and Japan in Northeast Asia could expand to the South China Sea, West Asia, and even Europe.
This would allow the United States to build a new global security network.
Ultimately, the hub-and-spoke system that was cutting edge during the Cold War has become an old fashion that no longer fits and is out of style.
So, what was designed was the so-called grid-type security framework.
--- p.254

North American relations are like planets orbiting on different cycles.
Since they each orbit in an elliptical orbit of different sizes, the chance of them meeting is extremely rare.
It was much more difficult for North America to sit down seriously with the Cowherd and the Weaver Girl than for a man from Mars and a woman from Venus to meet.
When the United States is friendly, North Korea closes its heart, and conversely, when North Korea is ready to open its heart, the United States is not interested.
This cycle occurs roughly once every 20 years since the end of the Cold War.
The most recent was the aforementioned 2018-2019 North Korea-US summit, and the one immediately preceding it dates back to the early 2000s.

--- p.269

Why is America so friendly to Japan?
Japan, the aggressor who started the world war, attacked Hawaii, saying that it would fight the United States.
Because of this, the world was hit by the atomic bomb for the first time.
Yet, the fact that it has been able to become America's 'BFF' for nearly 80 years cannot be explained without geopolitics.

--- p.280

The rest is as we know.
As the Soviet Union advanced rapidly into the Korean Peninsula, the United States, startled, unfolded a National Geographic wall map and hastily drew a line down the center of the Korean Peninsula.
Truman approved it on August 13, 1945.
The Korean Peninsula was divided two days before Japan declared unconditional surrender.
Japan's 'gaslighting' strategy of inducing the United States and the Soviet Union to divide and occupy the Korean Peninsula worked.
--- p.288

The compensation solution for victims of forced mobilization by Japan, announced by the South Korean government on March 6, 2023, resembles the 2015 comfort women agreement in many ways.
It's like a solution for eight-year-old brothers.
What's interesting is that the comfort women agreement came out in the third year of Obama's second term, and the solution to compensation for forced mobilization also came out in the third year of the Biden administration.

The issue of historical disputes, the biggest point of contention in Korea-Japan relations, was ironically resolved a year before the next presidential election in the United States.
In other words, it can be said that South Korea-Japan relations have "suddenly" improved at a time when both the Obama and Biden administrations need diplomatic achievements for the next election.

--- p.292

A marital dispute is not a public domain where the ‘perpetrator-victim/responsibility-compensation’ is clearly distinguished.
It is a private area where one can apologize and forgive, even if one is not at fault, for the sake of peace and well-being in the family.


The U.S. government's comparison of the sharp and sensitive historical issue between Korea and Japan to a marital dispute and its self-described "divorce counselor" clearly demonstrates how it has approached the issue.
In other words, the Obama administration at the time admitted that it was focusing on the comfort women 'agreement' rather than the 'comfort women' agreement.


From this point on, the United States showed more interest in resolving the historical conflict between Korea and Japan quickly rather than properly.
Because when a couple fights, it is more important to quickly reconcile than to figure out who is at fault.
Ultimately, the United States abandoned its role as a criminal court and defined itself as a family court that mediates marital disputes.

--- p.296

It was the Abe administration that helped ease America's worries.
Abe first visited India in 2007, during his first term as prime minister, and put forward the idea of ​​a "free and open Indo-Pacific."
For the Indian and Pacific Oceans to be freely connected, the South China Sea between them must be opened, which is like China's front yard where it is gradually expanding its influence.
For this reason, the Indo-Pacific concept has emerged as a plausible concept for blocking China's maritime advances.
From the American perspective, there could not have been a more plausible justification.
In short, it was a 'eureka' moment that made me slap my knee.

--- p.300