Special Projects
Empire builders: Neoconservatives and their blueprint for US power

Neocon quiz
Are you a neoconservative? Take this quiz to find out.
1. Which best describes your attitude about US efforts to secure peace between Israelis and Palestinians?
  
The US has compelling strategic interests in the region. America must be an "honest broker" between Israelis and Palestinians. By working with regional partners, the US can help bring about a secure Israel and a free state of Palestine. US efforts in the Mideast help its diplomatic standing in the world immensely.
  
It's an arrogant fantasy to think the US can "bring peace" to the Mideast. US reliance on foreign oil has embroiled it in crisis after crisis there. The people of the Middle East must set their own course.
  
Recent history shows that Arab countries respect power, not paper treaties that purport to trade "land for peace." In many ways, the road to peace in Jerusalem had to pass through Baghdad. In the wake of America's victory over Saddam Hussein, US negotiators have new leverage to demand steps toward peace. But the US can never tolerate terror. There will be no compromise on Israel's borders or security.
  
The US is morally obligated to stop Mideast violence. It's clear there is no military solution to the conflict. In order to broker the peace, the US must be more neutral. This means stop giving billions in aid to Israel, and start condemning its preemptive assassinations of Palestinian leaders.
2. The US campaign in Vietnam was...
  
A disaster. What threat did Vietnam pose to American security? More than 50,000 US troops died in support of a theory about "dominoes."
  
A failure. The American objective was strategically and morally bankrupt.
  
A quagmire. The US had the right strategy - it was important to contain communist expansion into Asia - but executed the wrong tactics. High casualty rates and low public support put the US in an unwinnable war.
  
A hard-won victory. US forces paid a high - but necessary - price to contain Communism in Southeast Asia.
3. What type of relationship should the US form with China?
  
The US must hedge China's rise to great-power status. The policy of preemption includes China, and US military leaders must strategically contain China's armed forces, while US policymakers maintain America's economic preeminence. Above all else, China must not be encouraged to think it can challenge America's superpower status.
  
China's bullying - of Tibet, Falun Gong, and Taiwan - is atrocious. America's "normalization" of trade with China has allowed it to continue its human rights abuses, while costing countless American jobs. The US must not sacrifice its moral high ground at the altar of trade.
  
China presents great potential dangers - and rewards - to American interests in the 21st century. While the US must affirm China's progressive steps and opening economy, it cannot ignore its repressive human rights behavior, trade violations, and bullying of Taiwan. Ultimately, opening China to American goods and services spreads American values that will influence China for the better.
  
The US should neither appease nor aggravate China. China is a bellicose regional power and its human-rights record is appalling. But it doesn't threaten US interests. The US must stop giving China preferential trade treatment and do more to protect American jobs, but it needn't contain or confront China.
4. How should the US approach relations with Iran?
  
The US must remember its history with Iran. Pro-West reform efforts - including the 1953 CIA coup that installed the Shah - incited the Islamic Revolution. US-led regime change would once again empower the most backward and hardline elements of radical Islam. The people of Iran must set their own course for freedom. Meanwhile, the US must turn to its EU partners to push for stricter inspections of Iran's nuclear facilities.
  
The US is simply not positioned to stop Iran's seemingly inevitable drive to acquire nuclear weapons. But as it did with the Soviet Union and China before, America can contain and deter Iran's mullahs and their nuclear leverage. Hard-line Islamic rule in Iran is bankrupt and doomed to failure - democratic reformers will eventually seize the day. Patience and pressure, not preemptive war should guide America's approach toward Iran.
  
Iran's hardline Islamic regime, proven connections to terrorists networks, and obvious desire for nuclear weapons make it a particularly dangerous threat. The mullahs who run Iran have repressed freedom at every turn, and show no evidence of ending ties to terrorism. To ensure that Iran does not threaten US security, American forces must be prepared to do to Tehran what they did to Baghdad.
  
Iran presents a serious foreign policy challenge. Most Iranians clearly embrace democratic reform, but its hardline Islamic government seems intractable. Aggressive support for reformer efforts may be unwise at this time. The US must make a concerted effort with its European and regional allies to pressure Iran's regime to cease its nuclear ambitions.
5. How should the US deal with the North Korea nuclear threat?
  
Seattle or Pyongyang? At some point soon, President Bush must decide which city he values more. The N. Korea nuclear threat is for real, and even tough negotiations with the US, China, Japan, and South Korea won't deter Kim Jong Il. The unpleasant, but only, option the US has is to prepare to launch a preemptive strike against select N. Korean targets.
  
The nature of the North Korea crisis makes the Bush doctrine inoperative. The region is such a tinderbox that military action taken against N. Korea could lead to a full-blown conflagration. However, China, Japan, and South Korea - working together - can apply enough pressure on Kim Jong Il to contain the nuclear threat he poses. For now, the US must rely on multilateral talks while it repositions US forces in the peninsula to make them less vulnerable.
  
The US has a moral obligation to battle both the starvation of North Korea's people and deter Kim Jong Il's nuclear threats. There's no easy solution, but the US can make progress with a carrot-and-stick approach of foreign aid and tough diplomacy. The US must work with the UN to keep Pyongyang in check.
  
US policy in the Korean peninsula is outdated. Why should US troops be sitting ducks for Kim Jong Il's million-man army and nuclear threats? After 50 years, it's time South Korea protected itself. There's no point in "talking" with N. Korea, and all-out war is unthinkable. The US must move its troops out of the demilitarized zone.
6. The war against Saddam Hussein's regime was...
  
Not America's finest hour of diplomacy, but a necessary and righteous action.
  
A political and intelligence farce, a diplomatic disaster, a human tragedy, and now, a growing quagmire.
  
Another example of America's costly imperial aims.
  
Long overdue. Bringing democracy to Iraq is the first great step in democratizing the Middle East.
7. What do you think of America's superpower status?
  
Unrivaled US power is crucial to America's defense. But using power to "Americanize" the world, act as policeman in the far corners of the globe, or to leverage trade agreements is sheer imperialism.
  
US superpower status was key to warding off Soviet aggression during the cold war. Today, however, that power is increasingly a liability. 9/11 was a vicious blowback to the US bullying around the world, especially its trampling on the Middle East.
  
American power was vital to the victory of freedom over totalitarianism. In the post-cold war world, American power is equally necessary to preserve peace, foster freedom, and expand global trade. To be effective, this power must be used selectively, with clear, pragmatic aims, and carry the weight of allied consensus.
  
American power can spread peace and democracy across the globe. The world can't put its faith in the United Nations to thwart terrorists and tyrants. Diplomatic history shows that all regimes recognize power. Only unrivaled US power, and the demonstrated willingness to use it, can create the conditions that allow peace and prosperity to flourish.
8. How should the US approach alliances with foreign powers?
  
When the US leads, the world follows. The world is too full of danger for the US to take its foreign policy cues from the UN Security Council, or even the consensus of European allies. American security and interests must not be compromised to mollycoddle US allies unwilling or unable to face up to evil threats.
  
To preserve this country's sacred sovereignty, Americans must heed President George Washington's warning against "entangling alliances." Washington knew then, and we must understand now, that ceding control to foreign nations, let alone a world bureaucracy like the UN, chips away at the essence of the American Republic.
  
The US needs its allies now more than ever. The UN may not be perfect, but it remains humanity's best hope of creating world peace. America's unilateral actions are hurting vital relationships with traditional allies in Europe, Asia, and across the globe.
  
The US must march to the beat of its own drum, but its power is sapped when it marches alone. Healthy multilateral relations are vital to effective US diplomacy. America may not always agree with UN policy or even its best allies, but it can't afford to act alone.
9. How can the US win the war on terrorism?
  
American hypocrisy and hubris led to the Sept. 11 attacks. To answer the question "Why do they hate us?" Americans must question the "might makes right" approach of US foreign policy. To win the war against terrorism, US leaders must remove the conditions that breed anti-American hatred.
  
Terrorists can't be negotiated with. They must be killed or captured. "They hate us" because they - Muslim extremists - hate freedom. In the post-9/11 world, the US cannot wait for "imminent" threats. It must aggressively - even preemptively and unilaterally, if necessary - wipe out terrorist networks and the governments that support them. At the same time, the US can work to emasculate terrorism by aggressively promoting the cause of freedom and democracy around the world.
  
As 9/11 so viciously illustrates, terrorism knows no boundaries. To win the war against terrorism, the US must lead a truly global effort to root out terror networks and compel broad-based reform for regimes that harbor terrorists.
  
The US should not apologize for spreading American values around the globe, but its imperial behavior helped inspire the terrible Sept. 11 attacks. The US must relentlessly prosecute terrorists and work to undercut regimes that support them, but to prevent another Sept. 11, the US must stay truer to its founding as a republic by protecting the American people and staying out of other nations' business.
10. Does the US have the right balance between foreign and domestic priorities?
  
President George W. Bush rightly made the nation's security his No. 1 priority after 9/11. The growing deficit is unfortunate, but increased spending is certainly justified. The US didn't start the war on terrorism, but it will finish it, even if that moves some domestic concerns to the back burner.
  
The US is spending billions per month to help Iraqis, but millions of US workers can't find jobs. Managing a global empire is unconscionably costly.
  
The billions spent on homeland security and far-flung bombing campaigns haven't made the US any safer. With the money it wastes killing civilians abroad and chipping away at civil liberties at home, the US government could provide health insurance to all Americans.
  
If the cold war was World War III, 9/11 began the opening shots of World War IV. This is no time to "go wobbly" by whining about the federal budget deficit. Compared with the sacrifices Americans made in WWII, there is little to complain about. The cost to win the war on terrorism may be quite high, but the US truly cannot afford to lose this fight.

[ Results are not scientific. ]

Neocon 101

Don't know much about neoconservatism?
Learn basic concepts.

Key figures

Who are these guys?
Learn the path to power
for leading neocon lights.

Interactive quiz

Are you a "neocon"?

Expert Q&A

Two leading US foreign policy thinkers discuss
the neocon movement.

Max BootMax Boot
How much power do neoconservatives
really have?

Walter Russell MeadWalter Russell Mead
Which leaders in US history would be neoconservatives today?

Birth of a superpower

Timeline of key events in the history of US foreign policy.

In their own words

Remarks from leading figures.

Spheres of influence

Neocon think tanks, documents, and periodicals.