Richardcyoung.com

The Online Home of Author and Investor, Dick Young

  • Home
  • How We Are Different
  • About Us
    • Foundation Principles
    • Contributors
  • Investing
    • You’ve Read The Last Issue of Intelligence Report, Now What?
  • Your Survival Guy
  • The Great Reset
  • COVID-19
  • My Rifles
  • Dividends and Compounding
  • Your Security
  • The Swiss Way
  • Dick Young
  • Debbie Young
  • Key West
  • Paris
  • Dick’s R&B Top 100
  • Liberty & Freedom Map
  • Bank Credit & Money
  • Your Survival Guy’s Super States
  • NNT & Cholesterol
  • Work to Make Money/Invest to Save Money
  • Your Health
  • Ron Paul
  • US Treasury Yield Curve: My Favorite Investor Tool

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

  • Can Ginger Combat Heart Disease and Improve Circulation?
  • Concentrate on Dividend Record and Compounding
  • Your Cash Swept into Your Broker’s Bank Account!
  • Paris, The Palace Hotels: Part I
  • We’ll Burn the Place Down!
  • Protection While Traveling in France
  • The Case for Individual Stocks: Now More than Ever
  • Sen. Hawley Makes the Case Against U.S.-China Relationship
  • “An Epic Struggle Over the Definition of America”
  • Stunned Democrats Against “Defund Police”

Disclosure

RSS Youngresearch.com

  • Warren Miller: If You Don’t Do It This Year, You’ll Be…
  • Are the Realists Winning the Debate over the Future of EVs?
  • CATO: Global Freedom Is in Sharp Decline
  • Biden Administration Destroying Retiree Fiduciary Protections
  • 4 Life Changing Words for Your Survival Guy: “You Should Try This”
  • Suddenly, Holding Cash Looks Good Again to Many
  • Anti-Carbon Crusaders in Davos Talk ESG and OPM
  • Is Passive Investing Already Passé?
  • Welcome to Hotel California, Where You Can Never Leave
  • What You’re Telling Me Matters

RSS Yoursurvivalguy.com

  • Warren Miller: If You Don’t Do It This Year, You’ll Be…
  • CATO: Global Freedom Is in Sharp Decline
  • TIME FOR A GONDOLA? Little Cottonwood Canyon Jammed with Traffic
  • Biden Administration Destroying Retiree Fiduciary Protections
  • 4 Life Changing Words for Your Survival Guy: “You Should Try This”
  • Anti-Carbon Crusaders in Davos Talk ESG and OPM
  • Welcome to Hotel California, Where You Can Never Leave
  • What You’re Telling Me Matters
  • The Rich Seek More from Bank Accounts
  • California’s Wealth Tax Will Drive Out Remaining Rich Residents

How to Fight Wokism Idiocy

Despite Western Aid the Russians Are Slowly Taking Ukraine’s Territory

Warren Miller: If You Don’t Do It This Year, You’ll Be…

The Man Who Tried to Prevent the Challenger Space Shuttle Disaster

Ukraine Front Lines Increasingly Bloody

Is Diesel Fuel About to Become Even More Expensive?

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