Richardcyoung.com

The Online Home of Author and Investor, Dick Young

  • Home
  • How We Are Different
  • Debbie Young
  • About Us
    • Foundation Principles
    • Contributors
  • Investing
    • You’ve Read The Last Issue of Intelligence Report, Now What?
  • Your Survival Guy
  • The Great Reset
  • The Swiss Way
  • My Rifles
  • Dividends and Compounding
  • Your Security
  • Dick Young
  • Key West
  • Paris
  • Dick’s R&B Top 100
  • Liberty & Freedom Map
  • Bank Credit & Money
  • Your Survival Guy’s Super States
  • NNT & Cholesterol
  • Your Health
  • Ron Paul
  • US Treasury Yield Curve: My Favorite Investor Tool
  • Anti-Gun Control
  • Anti-Digital Currency
  • World Gold Mine Production

Imagining a Different GOP Foreign Policy Establishment

March 22, 2016 By Justin Logan

A Republican president with sound foreign policy instincts (stay with me here) would be crippled by the people staffing his administration. Since a president cannot serve as his own cabinet secretaries, or staff his own agencies at the deputy level, he would have to hire Republican foreign policy hands to do these jobs. Given the uniformly hawkish bent of the GOP foreign policy establishment and the disproportionate influence of neoconservatives among them, they would hobble if not destroy the strategy of such a president. “Personnel are policy,” as the old saying goes.

At the risk of revealing how daunting the project would be, then, it is worth considering how to make the Republican foreign policy establishment better.

During a meeting I attended at Harvard several years ago, the attending group of restraint-minded international relations scholars and one major philanthropist was asked what they would do with $10 or $20 million. A range of answers surfaced. My own was “start raising money.” This elicited an eye roll and a probing question from the philanthropist, but I stand by my answer. In the war of ideas at present, restraint is hopelessly outgunned.

It might be easiest to break down the problem functionally. The relevant instruments would be think tanks, publications, journalists, pressure groups, and donors, in no particular order. This week, we’ll look at think tanks. In subsequent weeks, we’ll examine publications, journalists, pressure groups, and donors.

It is too much to ask for a quick turnaround when it comes to right-of-center think tanks on foreign policy. The combination of ideological blowback, having one’s mortgage paid by those with interest in sustaining the status quo, and simple inertia make that unlikely.

What one might hope is that the John Hulsman saga is never again a live possibility. In 2006, the Heritage Foundation scholar was allegedly sacked for being too critical of Bush the Younger and the Iraq War, and made to sign a nondisclosure agreement to prevent him from discussing the terms of his dismissal. The man said to be responsible for firing Hulsman was Kim Holmes, who, whatever his ideological disposition, showed himself to be a far lesser scholar than Hulsman after the latter’s departure.

The best that can be hoped for when it comes to the think tanks is that the middle-of-the-road, more partisan institutes like Heritage do not return to their Bush-Cheney worst. AEI, the Hudson Institute, and the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies are duty-bound and money-motivated to stay neoconservative. A non-neoconservative AEI is unthinkable. What is thinkable is that a place like Heritage would make a big, showy hire not of a noninterventionist, but a Republican realist. Someone a lot like John Hulsman, actually. It would serve as a sort of bat-signal to any disgruntled Hill staffers or others with interest in rekindling conservative realism.

When I worked at the Cato Institute, I believed every argument I made (and probably still do). But at least when it came to foreign policy, it was necessary to keep in mind the size of the ask. In terms of change from existing policy, what we were asking for was revolutionary: many fewer wars, many fewer allies, gutting the defense budget, mostly leaving the Middle East, Europe, and East Asia. In a Weberian sense, our job was to represent the extreme fringe of opinion. If successful, we broadened the spectrum of allowable debate–in the process, pulling the center progressively in our direction.

What would be ideal is perestroika among right-of-center foreign policy think tanks, in which they hired more realists (not to say noninterventionists, necessarily), and engaged publicly with groups like Cato, inviting their scholars to debates and taking up their arguments. Without a massive influx of money, however, this is unlikely to happen.

FLASHBACK Video: John Hulsman on Prudence and Foreign Policy

Related Posts

  • Toward a Libertarian Foreign Policy
  • Switzerland’s Foreign Policy
  • Donald Trump Attempting to Shake Foreign Policy Establishment
  • Author
  • Recent Posts
Justin Logan
Justin Logan is a contributing editor for RichardCYoung.com. Formerly the Cato Institute's director of foreign policy studies, Logan writes primarily about politics and American foreign policy. He holds a master’s degree in international relations from the University of Chicago and a bachelor’s degree in international relations from American University. He is an expert on U.S. grand strategy, international relations theory, and American foreign policy. He has lectured on American strategy across the country and across the world, and his articles have appeared in International Security, the Journal of Strategic Studies, Foreign Policy, the National Interest, the Harvard International Review, Orbis, National Review, the American Conservative, Reason, Politico, and the American Prospect, among others. A native Missourian, Logan currently lives in Washington, DC with his wife and two sons, where they are opening a Latin American wine and spirits bar, Ruta del Vino.
Latest posts by Justin Logan (see all)
  • The Case for Zero-Based Strategy - December 4, 2018
  • Thinking About a Noninterventionist Political Alliance - October 29, 2018
  • The Iran Issue Is Not Going Away …and All of the Wrong People Are in Charge - September 25, 2018

Dick Young’s Must Reads

  • Gstaad and the Swiss Way
  • “I’m Having Major Surgery Tomorrow,” He Said
  • “The Goal”: Strong Families, Resilient Faith, Thriving Middle Class.
  • You’ve Read The Last Issue of Intelligence Report, Now What?
  • My Battle-Hardened Stock Market Strategy for the Worst of Times
  • Can Curcumin Help in Fighting Cancer?
  • You Need to Seek Some Shelter for When Things Get Ugly
  • Early Advice from Her Dad on Tipping at Charlie Trotter’s
  • Meet Me at Freddy’s June 2022
  • The Problem in America

Disclosure

RSS Youngresearch.com

  • Happy Memorial Day!
  • Your Survival Guy in Rome 30-Years A.B. (After Babson)
  • Money Market Assets Hit Record High: $5.4 Trillion
  • A Three-Week International Research Trip to Paris via Rome
  • The Mania in AI Stocks Has Arrived
  • What Does That Have to Do with Your Dividend?
  • The Wisdom of Sam Zell
  • How Activists Have Weaponized Corporate Boards
  • Is an Investment Property Disaster Looming?
  • Letter to the Federal Reserve Chairman from Your Survival Guy

RSS Yoursurvivalguy.com

  • Happy Memorial Day: Your Survival Guy: Proud To Be an American
  • Your Survival Guy in Rome 30-Years A.B. (After Babson)
  • Insurers Now Fleeing the Net Zero Insurance Alliance
  • A Three-Week International Research Trip to Paris via Rome
  • Will Biden Repeat Obama with US Debt Downgrade?
  • What Does That Have to Do with Your Dividend?
  • The ESG Cartel
  • Two More States Nearing Passage of Permitless Carry Legislation
  • How Activists Have Weaponized Corporate Boards
  • Letter to the Federal Reserve Chairman from Your Survival Guy

Commemorating Memorial Day

LIKE FATHER LIKE SON: RFK Jr. Opposes Left Wing Fanaticism

Preserving Liberty Through Homeschooling

Joe Biden’s Death Warrant for Fossil Fuel Plants

Will Anyone from the FBI Be Held Accountable for the Russiagate Hoax?

A Memorial Day Message

Copyright © 2023 | Terms & Conditions | About Us | Dick Young | Archives