The American Trap

Abstract

Pierucci's book does not pretend to be an academic publication. However, it presents verifiable information with clear references and analyses of great utility for those who study international power structures. The contribution is particularly relevant for the field of International Political Economy which tries to unravel the complex interdependence between international politics and economics.Gilpin (1987) identified how crucial it has become for US hegemony to prevent foreign economies from appropriating American technologies and the monopoly rents generated by innovation. An important field of research, then, is to understand how the US uses its power to promote the interests of US-based global corporations as part of the effort to reproduce its hegemony. And what kind of power is used? Hard power (military force), soft power (influencing through culture and ideology) or smart power (an intelligent combination of the two)? Pierucci's book suggests the existence of a sophisticated power structure which might not fit into Joseph Nye's (2011) categories.The style of the book can be compared to Henry Kissinger's books, that is, based on personal observations as an actor of international politics and enriched with research. In this case, the author is a senior manager of the French industrial conglomerate, Alstom.Pierucci's thesis is that the US uses corporate anti-corruption and anti-bribery laws as an economic weapon to defend its own companies in a clear case of lawfare. The book can be seen as an updated version of Jean-Jacques Servan-Schreiber's famous, The American Challenge, published in 1967. Servan-Schreiber's thesis was that the US, through the operations of its multinationals, dominated European economies. This was at a time when Gilpin (1976) was arguing that the term 'multinational' was almost synonymous with US companies. That has changed, and corporate America now has to deal with competitors from other countries. Lawfare is used as part of what the author sees as an economic war.