SWOT Analysis: Globalism

Globalism: SWOT Analysis

Table of Contents

• Introduction
• I. Globalism’s Geopolitical/Background Information
  • Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats, (SWOT)
• II. The Nature and Scope of Globalism
  • Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats, (SWOT)
• III. The Key Globalist Actors
  • Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats, (SWOT)
• IV. The Timeliness and Impact of Globalist Policy
  • Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats, (SWOT)
• V. Other Legal, Geopolitical, and Policy Issues Concerning Globalism
  • GAP Analysis
• VI. USFP Recommendations on Globalism
  • Proposal I
  • Proposal II
  • Proposal III
• Conclusion

The purpose of this SWOT Analysis is to discover the best course of action for U.S. foreign policy concerning globalism and collective international cooperation. This SWOT will ensure America takes the best approach in adopting domestic initiatives that exist independent of the renowned globalist agenda. One specific challenge that the United States must engage in as a matter of U.S. foreign policy is the preclusion of globalization through the stewardship of protectionism.

America must concern its own policy objectives before it commits itself to any global initiative. Moreover, America must obtain enough domestic benefit that policymakers are inclined to support through representation. America’s multipolar relationship requires an understanding of foreign competition, while remaining resilient in national culture, (Matthew 5:44-45).

Globalism produces unfavorable “growing concerns” of foreign governments use of “state support and guidance” to enrich “industries,” (Congress, 2024) thereby potentially decreasing foreign competitiveness, (Congress, 2024). Conversely, “Adam Smith [1723–1790] described self-interest and competition in a market economy as the ‘invisible hand’ that guides the economy,” (StLouisFed, 2012).

I. Geopolitical/Background Information

Strengths. Geopolitically, sincere prospects of globalization began following World War II, whereby America initiated a series of international institutions designed to reconstruct the allied nations that had been impacted as a result of the war, (WEForum, 2019).

Weaknesses. Globalization relies on industrial policy. But the term industrial policy bears no formal definition, as it, “commonly refers to a comprehensive, deliberate, and more or less consistent set of government policies designed to change or maintain a particular pattern of production and trade within an economy,” (Schwarzenberg, A., CRS, 2024). As each nation defines industrial policy differently, globalization presupposes the acquiescence of domestic representation; supplanted by policy curated from a minority of institutional “experts,” (Schwarzenberg, A., CRS, 2024).

Opportunities. America is positioned with an opportunity to embrace “[t]he trends in trade openness and FDI therefore seem to suggest that a backlash against economic globalization, driven at least partly by protectionist and restrictive policies, has occurred over roughly the past decade,” (Mansfield, E.; Milner, H.; & Rudra N., p. 2269). Industrial policy “involves policies designed to promote emerging industries or prop up declining ones, as well as the channeling of resources into specific sectors and activities considered important for economic growth,” (Schwarzenberg, A., CRS, 2024).

Threats. Globalization erodes national culture and tradition; on centralizing nations, enacting hierarchy, and unifying law, (Mingst & McKibben, p. 5). Globalization allows smaller states to profit at the expense of larger hegemons, (Mingst & McKibben, p. 16). Globalization violates natural law, (Genesis 11:7–9).

II. The Nature/Scope of the Issue

Strengths. Domestically, globalization secures the United States’s essential resources, allowing greater benefit from comparative advantage by maximizing exports, whilst gaining access to imports, (Mingst & McKibben, p. 276).

Weaknesses. Regionally, globalization is detrimental as more states strive to comply with national initiatives that meet global mandates, (Mingst & McKibben, p. 308).

Opportunities. Internationally, globalization allows America an opportunity to foster international relations with smaller nations. Moreover, it ensures collective security, reducing the potential for war.

Threats. Nationally, globalization presents a significant threat to U.S. national security, with global collectives acting as a “rhetorical Trojan horses concealing their true intention,” (Heritage, p. 10).

III. Key Actors in This Issue

Strengths. The key actors that adopt globalist initiatives are the president, his department heads, and the members of the executive. The primary motives of globalism are domestic enrichment, economic stability, and national security.

Weaknesses. The key actors that dictate globalist initiatives are foreign leaders, bureaucracy, and international think tanks. America does not have the authority to control the position of international institutions.

Opportunities. America has an opportunity to set contemporary precedence in the state of global affairs.

Threats. Politicians and policymakers who align with globalist initiatives and international alliances adopt the narratives of the supermajority. Moreover, “America’s corporate and political elites do not believe in the ideals to which our nation is dedicated—self-governance, the rule of law, and ordered liberty,” (Heritage, p. 10).

IV. Timeliness and Impact of the issue: Economic Structure and Situation

Strengths. The long-term threats to America from globalization can be mitigated by executing immediate action. America is endowed with exceptional diplomacy and national resources that offer a comparative advantage when engaging in foreign policy.The intensity of America’s impact will remain contingent on its immediacy in the role of global affairs.

Weaknesses. Globalism lacks popularity. Mansfield, et al. cite economic and cultural forces are the primary influences of globalization; reporting that “[n]ot only are some voters pushing back against liberal foreign economic policies, but this discontent is manifesting itself in political polarization and the fierce resistance of traditional cultural forces,” (Mansfield, E.D.; Milner, H.V.; Rudra, N., p. 2280).

Opportunities. Globalism allows curated initiatives to be adopted by nations. Under the framework of globalization, America can obtain the greatest benefit by aligning with the majority of other nations. The World Economic Forum predicts that “[t]his is a critical moment for Europe,” if they are to be a part of “[t]he global winners in the digital era” (WEF, 2019).

Threats. Globalization will degrade the purpose of national autonomy; the value of culture; and the significance of regional traditional; as states are incentivized to comply with hegemonic oversight. Globalization represents a state of pure democracy, whereby the majority tyrannize the minority. Here, globalization incentivizes discrimination by coercion under the illusion of collective security.

V. Other Legal, Geopolitical, and Policy Issues

The greatest threat to U.S. national security is the erosion of national culture and tradition. As reminded in the New Testament, despite the worldly temptations to exploit the international system, policymakers must remain committed to America’s objective domestic civic principles. The Apostle Paul writes in the New Testament “[d]o not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect,” (Romans 12:2; ESV). America must remember to remain impartial in its foreign alliances, and remain neutral in the face of global contention. This will require three direct courses of USFP action: (1) plurilateralization; (2) demilitarization; and (3) prioritization of the security of U.S. citizens.

VI. USFP Recommendations

USFP 1 – Operation Plurilateral Digitization: Closing the Gap from Influence Abroad

            The U.S. should align plurilaterally with Europe to further its use of digitalization and 5G technology. Conversely, America should reject partnering with China’s digital infrastructure; instead aligning with the Western tradition of privacy. While “the US and China [are] similarly driving the deployment of high-performing 5G” the differences in China’s fundamental values and its structure of government are opposite to America’s (WEF, 2025). China’s influence, its lack of privacy, and accumulation of foreign data have contributed to the rising of global tensions, (WEF, 2025); unfavorably affecting America’s sovereignty, culture, and tradition. China has already begun to formulate an international standard for data trading, building its own data trading market, (NPC, 2021) Under Article 19 of China’s Data Security Law, adopted in 2021, decrees that “[t]he state shall establish sound systems for data trading management, standardize data trading activities, and foster a data trading market,” (NPC, 2021). Thus, America must accordingly foster its own standard, striving to obtain concurrence from the European Union, Israel, Australia, Japan, Russia, and India. Thus, America should “[r]e-examine patent eligibility requirements in Section 101 of the Patent Act,” (Heritage, p. 685). Moreover, “[n]o other region of the world has institutions as extensive and as well-developed as

those in Europe,” (Mearsheimer, J., p. 6).

The growing distancing of collectivization has led to many states to favor protectionism—a growing influence throughout the world, (WEF, 2019). Global collectivism equates to an acknowledged domestic lack, whereby nations advocate their willingness to rely on their own comparative advantages in hopes of attaining collective security, (Mingst & McKibben, p. 275). Many nations now strive to engage in absolute advantage, thereby preserving their culture and tradition while wielding their own authority regarding domestic policy. Thus, plurilateralism has become a viable force of power on the world stage. Plurilateralism is not plutocracy, a state defined as “[g]overnment by the wealthy,” (Garner, B., p. 1399). Rather, plurilateralism offers smaller countries greater national security under the tutelage of Western authority.

Edward D. Mansfield, Helen V. Milner, and Nita Rudra (henceforth Mansfield, et al.) record that “[d]ata collected by Evenett and Fritz (2019) provide further evidence of a globalization backlash in the arena of foreign trade policy,” Specifically, Mansfield, et al. write that “[b]ased on an analysis of thousands of government policy changes affecting overseas commerce,” there is an observable “increase in worldwide protectionism since 2012,” (Mansfield, E.D.; Milner, H.V.; Rudra, N., p. 2271). In order to best seize the opportunities and remove the threats, America must focus on its domestic policy, and abstain from acquiescing to collective suggestion. No international institution can force the U.S. to comply with its agenda, yet America has remained proactive in the funding and policymaking of international institutions.

USFP 2 – Operation Un-NATO: Abandon NATO, Globally Demilitarize, Domestically Remilitarize

            The U.S. must demilitarize internationally and withdraw its troops from foreign nations.

America is seen as a killing machine in smaller nations across the world. America was the principle force behind the creation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), (State, 2018). While NATO was formed “in response to the exigencies of the developing Cold War, [it] has lasted beyond the end of that conflict,” (State, 2018). Frank Appel (2019) noted at the World Economic Forum that “[t]here are never ever any agreements which last forever and that are right forever, so to ask for a level playing field is not wrong,” (WEF, 2019).

Although NATO was created as “the first peacetime military alliance the United States entered into outside of the Western Hemisphere;” it has equivocated the meaning of “peacetime,” to allow for foreign assassinations and coup d’état regime changes across the world; in favor of hegemonic enrichment, (State, 2018). The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) writes that “[t]he principle of collective defence is at the very heart of NATO’s founding treaty,” (NATO, 2022). In response to 9/11 NATO enacted Article 5, the alliance pivoted its theory into practice and began “a far-reaching transformation of its capabilities,” (NATO, 2022). Now, NATO seeks to “[take] additional steps to further strengthen deterrence and defence across the Alliance. This includes the deployment of the NRF for the first time in a deterrence and defence role,” (NATO, 2022).

            The Founding Fathers warned of the expectations surrounding foreign alliances. Multilateralism has led America into persistent foreign wars. Thus unilateral action must be taken to remove America from its prior global military commitments. James Madison described foreign diplomacy as “class of powers forms an obvious and essential branch of the federal administration,” (Madison, J., p. 221). In the Federalist No. 43, James Madison noted that “republican principles,” included that possession of an “authority to defend the system against aristocratic or monarchical innovations,” (Madison, J., p 225). The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is an alliance that does not align with the Framers’ values and intentions for America. Madison added “the rights of humanity must in all cases be duly and mutually respected;” alongside “a common interest,” (Madison, J., p. 230).

The United States is the main hegemon of NATO. Thus, Americans bear the burden of the debt, funding international conflicts around the world. The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) reported that “[i]n FY 2022, [the] DoD provided $6.3 billion;” in security assistance to Ukraine, (State, 2025). Moreover, “[i]n FY 2023, [it] provided $12.1 billion;” and in 2024, it “provide[d] Ukraine military assistance totaling approximately $31.7 billion from DoD stockpiles,” (State, 2025). From Iraq to Africa to the “collective task” of “preserv[ing] the security of Alliance airspace,” (NATO, 2023).

USFP 3 – Operation Domestic Priority: Total Withdrawal from Global Institutions

            The U.S. must withdraw from Global Institutions; specifically, collective health, military, and green energy foreign policy should be abandoned. The U.S. must exit the World Bank, and the World Trade Organization; as “[t]oday, China is the world’s largest official creditor, maintaining a portfolio more than twice the size of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund combined,” (Heritage, p. 725). Additionally, “[t]he failure of the World Trade Organization (WTO) to discipline China for abrogation of its trading commitments has . . . made it a largely ineffective institution,” (Heritage, p. 55). The United States continues to be the main supporter of global institutions, an exemption that does not count as foreign aid. The majority of these institutions do not benefit America, but deplete its resources and distribute its economy; (KFF, 2025). The United States remains the World Health Organization’s (WHO) primary funder since its inception, (KFF,2025).  Historically, these “contributions have ranged between $163 million and $816 million annually over the last decade,” (KFF, 2025). But the World Health Organization’s (WHO) fallacious guidance and erroneous data resulted in the deaths of over one million Americans during the SARS-CoV-2 COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic, (Worldometers).

Global health institutions like the World Health Organization’s (WHO) agenda is contingent on financial obligation, and vastly differential from America’s national priorities. The WHO includes its own Constitution that claims hegemony over its members interests during global health emergencies, (WHO). But the only obligation that the WHO has is public health, whereas America faces an extensive array of other priorities: the main national priorities of the United States include (1) securing national resources; (2) exporting natural resources; (3) enriching the domestic economy; (4) civic representation; (5) public education; (6) common sense policymaking; (7) lowering taxes, (8) deterring war and (9) precluding crime, (WhiteHouse, 2025).

Conversely, “NGOs perform a variety of functions and roles in international relations. They advocate specific policies and offer alternative channels of political participation,” (Mingst & McKibben, p. 343). Independent American foundations like World Vision work to improve foreign nations in need. Moreover, these institutions strive to coordinate domestic policy strategies with the White House. In 2024, World Vision “sent over 30,000 digital messages to members of Congress” and “[m]et in-person and virtually with members of Congress or their staff 246 times,” (WorldVision). Thus, the U.S. can utilize its own domestic foundations to establish more impactful initiatives that align with an American first agenda.

Conclusion

In sum, to fully justify and substantiate U.S. advocation of protectionism, America’s distinct domestic priorities must choose its own national agenda over that of deglobalization. While globalization began inherently benevolent in its intentions to preserve nations in need, it has devolved to present a threat to American foreign policy. Now, three methods must be utilized to reel back the foreign drift that policymakers have neglected to correct. Controlling the privacy of domestic datasets, demilitarizing globally, and returning focus to America first agenda will enrich the nation and offer greater opportunity for the posterity of its citizenry.

Bibliography

CFR. (Accessed on May 1^st, 2025). What Does the G20 Do? https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-does-g20-do?_gl=1*6boihf*_gcl_au*MTkxNDk1ODUxNi4xNzQ2MDQwMjE1*_ga*MjAwMzU3NzU4Mi4xNzQ2MDQwMjE1*_ga_24W5E70YKH*MTc0NjEzMDU3MS4zLjEuMTc0NjEzMDY5MC42MC4wLjA.

CFRB. (Accessed on May 4^th, 2025). A Breakdown of Foreign Aid Obligations. https://www.crfb.org/blogs/breakdown-foreign-aid-obligations

Congress. (Accessed on April 30^th, 2025). Industrial Policy and International Trade. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12119

CRS. (Accessed on May 4^th, 2025). Industrial Policy and International Trade. http://congress.gov/crs-product/IF12119

KFF. (Accessed on May 4^th, 2025). The U.S. Government and the World Health Organization. https://www.kff.org/global-health-policy/fact-sheet/the-u-s-government-and-the-world-health-organization/

Heritage. (Accessed on May 4^th, 2025). Project 2025. https://www.heritage.org/conservatism/commentary/project-2025?gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=10679077640&gbraid=0AAAAACfelfwxiqx6Di3mqw42-ZpkfcTW1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI5teh9cqKjQMVx15HAR1rej2GEAAYASAAEgKgvfD_BwE

Heritage. (Accessed on May 4^th, 2025). Project 2025: Mandate For Leadership. https://whatisproject2025.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf

IMF. (Accessed on May 1^st, 2025). Group of Twenty: Reaching Net Zero Emissions. https://www.imf.org/external/np/g20/pdf/2021/062221.pdf

Mansfield, E.D.; Milner, H.V.; Rudra, N. (Accessed on May 1^st, 2025). The Globalization Backlash: Exploring New Perspectives. https://doi.org/10.1177/00104140211024286

Mearsheimer, J. J. (1994). The False Promise of International Institutions. International Security, 19(3), 5–49. https://doi.org/10.2307/2539078

Mingst, K. A., McKibben, H. E. (2021). Essentials of International Relations, 9th Edition. [VitalSource Bookshelf 10.3.1]. Retrieved from vbk://9780393872033

NATO. (Accessed on May 2^nd, 2025). Collective Defence and Article 5. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm

NATO. (Accessed on May 4^th, 2025). Operations and Missions: Past and Present. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_52060.htm

NPC. (Accessed on May 4^th, 2025). Data Security Law of the People’s Republic of China. http://www.npc.gov.cn/englishnpc/c2759/c23934/202112/t20211209_385109.html

Schwarzenberg, A., CRS. (Accessed on May 1^st, 2025). What Are International Organizations? https://education.cfr.org/learn/reading/six-essential-international-organizations-you-need-know

StLouisFed. (Accessedon May 4^th, 2025). The Role of Self-Interest and Competition in a Market Economy. Education. St. Louis Fed. https://www.stlouisfed.org/education/economic-lowdown-podcast-series/episode-3-the-role-of-self-interest-and-competition-in-a-market-economy

State. (Accessed on May 4^th, 2025). U.S. Security Cooperation with Ukraine. https://www.state.gov/bureau-of-political-military-affairs/releases/2025/01/u-s-security-cooperation-with-ukraine#

:~:text=In%20FY%202022%2C%20DoD%20provided,Congress%20have%20now%20been%20committed.

State. (Accessed on May 1^st, 2025). Milestones. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/nato

USTR. (Accessed on April 30^th, 2025). Interagency Center on Trade Implementation, Monitoring, and Enforcement (ICTIME). https://ustr.gov/issue-areas/enforcement/ictime

WEF. (2019, January 22). Globalization: Retreat or Reinvention? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XU2CkYTXra0&ab_channel=WorldEconomicForum

WEF. (Accessed on May 2^nd, 2025). Europe Digitalization. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2025/01/europe-digitalization-5g-broadband-infrastructure/

WEForum. (Accessed on May 2^nd, 2025). A Brief History of Globalization. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2019/01/how-globalization-4-0-fits-into-the-history-of-globalization/

WHO. (Accessed on May 4^th, 2025). Constitution. World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/about/governance/constitution

Worldometers. (Accessed on May 4^th, 2025). Coronavirus Cases; Deaths. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

WorldVision. (Accessed on May 1^st, 2025). Donate. World Vision. https://donate.worldvision.org/give/refugee-childrens-crisis-fund?&campaign=400085408&utm_campaign=search-trust-fy24-brand&utm_medium=search&utm_source=google&utm_content=Crisis%20Q1FY24&ds_rl=1274668&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=6497732304&gbraid=0AAAAAD_qsmxMN9lMetEs20AZ6PSYG4owh&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI7a-lhJiDjQMVjFtHAR0wmwD8EAAYASAAEgJv6vD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds

WhiteHouse (Accessed on May 4^th, 2025). President Trump’s America First Priorities. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/2025/01/president-trumps-america-first-priorities/

WorldVision. (Accessed on May 1^st, 2025). Impact. World Vision Advocacy. https://live-advocacy.d2.worldvision.org/impact/