Richardcyoung.com

The Online Home of Author and Investor, Dick Young

  • Home
  • Debbie Young
  • Jimmy Buffett
  • Key West
  • Your Survival Guy
  • How We Are Different
  • Paris
  • About Us
    • Foundation Principles
    • Contributors
  • Investing
    • You’ve Read The Last Issue of Intelligence Report, Now What?
  • The Great Reset
  • The Swiss Way
  • My Rifles
  • Dividends and Compounding
  • Your Security
  • Dick Young
  • 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
  • Joel Salatin and Alfie Oakes
  • World Gold Mine Production
  • Fidelity and Vanguard Since 1971

Why Does Washington Agree on Foreign Policy?

September 6, 2016 By Justin Logan

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain and Ranking Member Jack Reed

On taxes, or abortion, or immigration, or the Second Amendment, or environmental degradation, or any of a hundred other high-voltage issues, Republicans and Democrats in Washington seem capable of disagreeing thoroughly and broadly, or even comprehensively. At times it seems like there is no detail too small to argue about.

It’s not that way on foreign policy. Sure, there are heated partisan debates about Benghazi, or Hillary Clinton’s use of email, or whether Donald Trump is lying in saying he opposed the Iraq War. But there is little debate on the substance of foreign policy itself. Even on smaller issues like the regime change war in Libya, there is little contentious debate.

And this says nothing about the broader questions of grand strategy: What countries should the United States be willing to go to war over? What sort of problems do nuclear proliferation, terrorism, or China’s military modernization pose? Should the United States pull in its horns, cut the defense budget, and start far fewer wars, or should it tear up the Iran deal, bomb Syria, and dramatically expand military spending?

On these questions, the foreign policy departments of Brookings and AEI–or really every think tank except for Cato–find little to disagree on. Isn’t that strange? Why would it be the case?

Those are the questions Ben Friedman and I take up in a paper to be published in an issue of Strategic Studies Quarterly later this year. The short version is as follows:

After demonstrating the lack of debate about grand strategy in Washington, we argue that the consensus strategy, primacy, serves the interests of U.S. political leaders, meaning there is little demand for arguments questioning it. Aspiring foreign policy hands would be poorly served professionally if they specialized in a product that their buyers–policymakers–did not want. Accordingly, think tankers and other members of the foreign policy community adopt what we call an “operational mindset”: scholars specialize in relative minutiae, giving support and the veneer of scholarly credibility to whatever foreign policy ideas the policymaker may have, without questioning the objectives themselves.

Rather than a “marketplace of ideas” in which policymakers peruse various policy shops for ideas, the role of the ideas people is mostly to lend scholarly credibility to, and possibly help implement, policymakers’ existing preferences. And policymakers’ existing preferences almost always equate to primacy, partly resulting from the normal bias toward activism among politicians, partly from ignorance, partly from social and other pressures, and partly from the fact that their own incentives point to an expansive grand strategy. In short, there are few restraints and many inducements facing policymakers when it comes to foreign policy.

If this is correct, consider then the incentives facing the think tanker, or the pundit, or the aspiring columnist or bureaucrat. There is little preexisting constituency for restraint in Washington, but many interests it would harm. This means it’s costly even to start asking hard questions of primacy. In the public, primacy is less popular and restraint is more popular, but the crucial variable among the public is salience. Foreign policy concerns rarely determine the outcomes of elections and as a consequence, public opinion presents no powerful obstacle to primacy and no great incentive to support restraint.

It’s for this reason that the foreign policy community adopts an operational mindset, proposing different ways to take a hill without questioning whether it’s the right hill in the first place, or, more realistically, better ways to occupy Iraq/expand NATO/coddle our friends without questioning whether they are good ideas in the first place. True debates about strategy are very rare in Washington.

What restraint-minded scholars need to work toward is a day where some shock causes policymakers to go looking for other ideas on grand strategy. As they look at their bookshelves, the better the arguments for restraint are formed, hopefully the more likely it is they will be adopted.

Related Posts

  • Is a Serious Washington Foreign Policy Blunder Just Ahead?
  • Toward a Libertarian Foreign Policy
  • Switzerland’s Foreign Policy
  • 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

  • Concentrate on Dividend Record and Compounding
  • Your Cash Swept into Your Broker’s Bank Account!
  • Remembering Brent Scowcroft
  • America’s Silent Army with 423M Guns
  • Yes! Money Can Bring You Happiness
  • Tucker Carlson Interviews My Favorite Florida Farmer
  • Your Survival Guy at Fidelity and Your RMD Compliance
  • Tom Brady Is Proof You Shouldn’t Retire if You Still Love Your Work
  • Marry Compound Interest, Divorce Market Timing
  • Washington Is the Systemic Risk

Compensation was paid to utilize rankings. Click here to read full disclosure.

RSS Youngresearch.com

  • “Wow, That Was an Obvious Buying Opportunity”
  • Americans Watch as Household Incomes Drop
  • “Doctor, What Are You Doing?” “Nothing,” He Said
  • Has Tupperware Survived Its Brush with Death?
  • Biden’s “War” On Fossil Fuels Keeps Shale Drillers Idle as Oil Prices Rise
  • “Oh, This Is Prime Real Estate,” They Say
  • Investing Habits of the Fairly Wealthy: #10 Powerball
  • “Then One Day the Grandfather was Gone”
  • India Chooses to Promote Coastal Trade. The US Should Too
  • “No Way I’m Spending That Much on Those”

RSS Yoursurvivalguy.com

  • “Wow, That Was an Obvious Buying Opportunity”
  • Does Anyone Remember the National Debt?
  • French Banker Endorses New International CBDC System
  • “Doctor, What Are You Doing?” “Nothing,” He Said
  • Bidenflation Making It Harder to Retire
  • Will Illinois Gun Owners Register Their Firearms?
  • “Oh, This Is Prime Real Estate,” They Say
  • Survive and Thrive September 2023: “I Want to Be a Farmer, a Garbageman, or Tom Brady”
  • Tucker and O’Reilly Discuss the Three People Everyone Needs
  • Investing Habits of the Fairly Wealthy: #10 Powerball

US Treasury Yield Curve: My Favorite Investor Tool

Five Year Treasury Yield

“The Economy Is Buried Under Trillions in Debt”

Horse Manure: Windmill/Sun Power Scheme

“Wow, That Was an Obvious Buying Opportunity”

The End of America’s One-Party System?

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