A New U.S. Grand Strategy: The Case for U.S. Retrenchment Overseas, With Stephen Wertheim
Mar 19, 2024
auto_awesome
Exploring the case for U.S. retrenchment in foreign policy, historical shifts from isolationism to containment, consequences of the Iraq War on US foreign policy, prioritizing Asia over Europe and the Middle East, and debating U.S. retrenchment and global power dynamics.
Advocates for US retrenchment overseas to avoid overcommitment and realign security priorities.
Critiques the historical isolationist label and emphasizes the complexity of US engagement.
Questions the sustainability and effectiveness of US pursuit of global dominance post-World War II.
Suggests shifting US foreign policy focus from prevention to deterrence and reassessing defense obligations.
Deep dives
Defining Grand Strategy and Its Components
Grand strategy is defined as a state's theory of how to create security and prosperity by Barry Pozen. Grand strategy involves aiming for a state's overall aims in the world and using hard power to secure these aims. The discussion highlights the importance of broadening the scope of grand strategy to include economic and transnational challenges like climate change.
Advocating for US Restraint and Retrenchment
The podcast guest, Stephen Wartheim, advocates for US restraint and retrenchment as opposed to military primacy. The argument is made that the US should pull back from simultaneous military engagements in Asia, Europe, and the Middle East to avoid overcommitment. This approach suggests reconsidering or minimizing US security commitments that are not aligned with current interests.
Debunking the Isolationist Label
Wartheim debunks the isolationist label attributing it to historical figures like the 'America Firsters' prior to WWII. He argues that isolationism is more of an epithet than a meaningful description, with very few individuals actually self-identifying as isolationists. The critique emphasizes the complexity of US engagement and the inadequacy of labeling individuals as isolationist.
Critique of US Foreign Policy Over Decades
A critique of American foreign policy since World War II to the post-Cold War era is presented. The discussion assesses the logic behind the US departure from its tradition of avoiding 'entanglements' and the subsequent adoption of a grand strategy focused on maintaining liberal world order. The critique questions the sustainability and effectiveness of the US pursuit of global dominance.
Rationale for Retrenchment in Europe and the Middle East
Wartheim presents three key reasons advocating for retrenchment in Europe and the Middle East: over commitment, overstretch, and domestic politics. The argument emphasizes the need for the US to reassess defense obligations, resource constraints, and political reliability to realign its security priorities. The proposal suggests minimizing US security presence in regions with lower vital interests while focusing on areas like Asia with higher economic significance.
Response to Critiques on Retrenchment
Addressing critiques on US retrenchment, the conversation refutes claims that prior retrenchment attempts led to crises or weakness. Contrary arguments highlight the necessity of reevaluating the benefits and costs of US security engagement in Europe and the Middle East. The discussion underscores the strategic shift required for Europe to enhance its defense capabilities independently, reducing US reliance in the region.
Key Considerations for Reframing US Foreign Policy
The podcast concludes by discussing the importance of shifting US foreign policy objectives from being primarily preventive to more focused on deterrence. Emphasizing the need for Europe to take greater responsibility for its defense, the conversation reflects on the implications of retrenchment for US security interests and global strategic dynamics. The guest, Stephen Wartheim, underscores the significance of reevaluating US commitments in diverse regions to adapt to changing international power dynamics.
Stephen Wertheim, a senior fellow in the American Statecraft Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, sits down with James M. Lindsay to discuss whether and where the United States should be less involved in the world. This episode is the first in a special The President’s Inbox series on U.S. grand strategy.
