President Obama’s recent speech to a combined assembly of Lords and Commons during his recent visit to the United Kingdom, argued — as well it should have — that in foreign affairs, international cooperation is essential. He reminded us of the special, historical relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom, and of the challenges facing our world today.

The most notable examples of Anglo-American cooperation occurred during the two World Wars. At the time of the first war, Britain was undoubtedly the most powerful country in the world. The sun never set on the British Empire, and the red bits on our maps were numerous.

By the time of the Second World War, the British nation had become decidedly weaker. The ravages of the First World War were fierce and, combined with economic downturn in the 1920s and 1930s, had contributed to fewer policing actions on its part. But its Empire remained vast. And because the British remained connected to large portions of the world, they retained an interest in international affairs.

This is despite the fact that the United Kingdom, with its 68 million people, has the world’s 22nd-largest population and, with its nominal gross domestic product of some $2.247 trillion, the world’s sixth-largest economy.

Today, it appears that the United States faces the same problem. Countries such as China and India produce huge amounts of products that we consume and depend on. Many American politicians seem fearful of the prospect of Chinese economic growth.

These fears need not be realized. Economic wealth is not necessarily an indicator of power. Prestige is important, as is the feeling that, just because a country has accomplished greatly meaningful tasks in the past, it will continue to do so in the future. The records of United States and the United Kingdom should still inspire such a feeling. Both countries have rich histories of confronting problems head-on, making few complaints and mitigating dangerous situations.

The United States, for all its indebtedness and deficit spending, surely does not need anyone’s help to best its enemies. Given its military strengths and capabilities, it could probably counter any threat.

But it is important that we bring partners with us when we act on the international stage. Britain, Obama said, is one such partner. Allies are important. Unilateral action may be very effective, but the goal of defending the United States does not merely require us to be militarily strong. National security demands that in the face of threats and the wake of our victories, we act in partnership with other countries.

In a conflict between, say, the United States and China, as many parties as possible should be involved. This world is shared by India, Germany, France, Britain, Russia, and the Middle Eastern states, too. All these countries have an interest in the peaceful order established — or left unestablished — by conflict resolution.

Edmund Burke, an Anglo-Irish statesman, is often paraphrased as saying that “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” While he is not known to have said exactly that, he did give this advice: “When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.”

In confronting problems, we should collaborate with others instead of alienating potential allies by acting unilaterally. That is true even if none of those others could ever possibly match our own power.