Boston University’s Joshua Shifrinson weighs in on a new critique of the restraint school in U.S. foreign policy debates and explains why the strategy proposed by some liberal internationalists to confront a rising China - a strategy he terms "neo-primacy" - is bound to fail. Show NotesJoshua Shifrinson bioJoshua R. Itzkowitz Shifrinson, “Neo-Primacy and the Pitfalls of US Strategy Toward China” The Washington Quarterly 41, no. 4 (Winter 2019): pp. 65-83.Bruce W. Jettleson, “Be Wary of China Threat Inflation,” Foreign Policy, July 30, 2021. Daniel Deudney and G. John Ikenberry, “Misplaced Restraint: The Quincy Coalition Versus Liberal Internationalism,” Survival 63, no. 4 (2021): pp. 7-32. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

9/11 set the course for U.S. national security policy in the 21st century, often with counterproductive results. Cato Institute senior fellow Justin Logan explains how post-9/11 foreign policy went off the rails and thrust America into disastrous elective wars and wasteful spending sprees. The lack of accountability for those who carried out such failures bodes ill for the future. Justin Logan bioJustin Logan, “The Case for Withdrawing from the Middle East,” Defense Priorities, September 2020. Justin Logan, “Why Wait Five to 10 Years to Leave?” Responsible Statecraft, June 24, 2021.Jane K. Cramer and A. Trevor Thrall, Why Did the United States Invade Iraq? (London: Routledge, 2012). Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

 As the U.S. military withdraws from Afghanistan, the Biden administration is retaining some presence nearby. Tactics are shifting, but U.S. intervention looks far from over. Cato research fellow Sahar Khan discusses the debate over building bases in Pakistan and the role of U.S. security contractors in the so-called Forever War. Show Notes Sahar Khan bioSahar Khan, “Double Game: Why Pakistan Supports Militants and Resists U.S. Pressure to Stop,” Cato Institute Policy Analysis no. 849, September 20, 2018.Imran Khan, “Imran Khan: Pakistan is Ready to be a Partner for Peace in Afghanistan, but We Will Not Host U.S. Bases,” Washington Post, June 21, 2021. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Many realists assume that national leaders are rational. But are they? University of Southern California professor Brian Rathbun draws on classical realism to argue that realpolitik is a demanding psychological standard that is less prevalent than often assumed. Constructive diplomacy obligates policymakers, therefore, to better account for both their own subjective biases and those of other states.Show NotesBrian Rathbun bioBrian Rathbun, Reasoning of State: Realists, Romantics and Rationality in International Relations (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2019).Brian C. Rathbun, Diplomacy’s Value: Creating Security in 1920s Europe and the Contemporary Middle East (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2014).Brian Rathbun, “The Reality of Realpolitik: What Bismarck Rationality Reveals about International Politics,” International Security 43, no. 1 (Summer 2018): 7-55. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has erupted again, but the politics in both Israel and the United States on this longstanding issue appear to be undergoing change. Jeremy Pressman, a political scientist at the University of Connecticut and an expert on the conflict, explains the historical context of the recent outbreak in violence, argues the cycle of military force undermines the objectives of both sides, and discusses the current tensions in the U.S.-Israeli relationship. Show NotesJeremy Pressman bioJeremy Pressman,The Sword is Not Enough: Arabs, Israelis, and the Limits of Military Force(Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, 2020).Jeremy Pressman, “Visions in Collision: What Happened at Camp David and Taba?”Quarterly Journal: International Security28. no. 2, (Fall 2003): 5-43. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

One longstanding predicate of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East -- that America's military presence in the Persian Gulf region protects the free flow of oil -- is false. That is according to University of Pennsylvania professor Robert Vitalis, along with a growing academic literature scrutinizing the claim. Because of the global nature of the oil market, even infamous past disruptions, such as the so-called Arab oil embargo of 1973, have not had as significant an effect as commonly believed. This erroneous basis for U.S. strategy, Vitalis explains, also justifies a misguided emphasis on Washington's close relationship with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, among other costly consequences. Robert Vitalis bioRobert Vitalis, Oilcraft: The Myths of Scarcity and Security That Haunt U.S. Energy Policy, (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2020). Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The renewed debate in Washington over U.S. foreign policy reflects changing attitudes in public opinion. George Mason University professor and Cato Senior Fellow A. Trevor Thrall discusses how generational differences are changing views on U.S. military activism and America's global role. Millennials and younger people generally support international engagement while rejecting excessive military intervention.  Show NotesA. Trevor Thrall bioA. Trevor Thrall and Erik Goepner, (2021), “The New Faces of Internationalism: How Generational Change Is Reshaping American Foreign Policy Attitudes,” Cato Working Paper, Cato Institute, Washington, DC. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Jessica Trisko Darden joins John Glaser to discuss how U.S. foreign aid tends to support state violence and coercion. Economic and military aid often helps undemocratic regimes secure and sustain their power and carry out human rights abuses. Even aid conditioned on good behavior and respect for democratic norms is highly fungible and often misused in ways that contradict the stated intentions of U.S. policymakers. Dr. Darden discusses the three case studies she details in her book to draw those conclusions.Jessica Trisko Darden bioJessica Trisko Darden,Aiding and Abetting: U.S. Foreign Assistance and State Violence, (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2020). Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

What are China's international ambitions and how does Beijing seek to achieve them? Johns Hopkins professor Daniel S. Markey joins the show to discuss how the People’s Republic of China has pursued evolving strategies in discrete regions and to explore what strategic options are open to the United States in response.Daniel S. Markey bioDaniel S. Markey, China's Western Horizon: Beijing and the New Geopolitics of Eurasia, (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2020). Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Dominic Tierney, associate professor at Swarthmore College, explains how the “negativity bias” affects international relations. Negativity bias causes threat inflation, leads policymakers to maintain failing policies out of loss aversion, and produces misconceptions that make conflict more likely. Biden administration policies towards Iran, Afghanistan, and China are discussed, among other issues.  Show Notes Dominic Tierney bioDominic D.P. Johnson and Dominic Tierney, “Bad World: Negativity Bias in International Politics,” International Security 43, no. 3 (Winter 2018/19): 96-140. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.