GOV 312L 1st Edition Lecture 2 Outline of Current Lecture I. Current EventsII. Defining Grand StrategyIII. Components of Grand StrategyIV. Discussion of Obama West Point SpeechV. IsolationismVI. Selective Engagement (Offshore Balancing)Current Lecture1. What is Grand Strategy?1. Some mapping with partisanship (bias), but not perfect.2. Rand Paul (senator of kentucky) tends to be looked at as isolationist3. McCain tends to support military force in Libya, Western Iraq, etc. 1. Wants to train special forces in Iraq.2. Believes ISIS is a very real threat to America4. McCain is closer to Obama administration’s Grand Strategy than Paul is.5. Grand Strategy tends to be related to, but not identical to partisanship6. 4 dimensions to Grand Strategy1. Isolationism (discussed in Lecture 3)2. Selective Engagement (Lecture 3)3. Liberal Internationalism (Lecture 4)4. Primacy (Lecture 4)7. Variances in Grand Strategies1. Scope: regional vs. global2. Unilateralism vs. Multilateralism1. M- US stresses working with others and other international agencies to achieve their goals2. U- US works alone to achieve their goals3. Power – Hard vs SofThese notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor’s lecture. GradeBuddy is best used as a supplement to your own notes, not as a substitute.1. Hard – aggressive, dominant or coercive actions (ex: military action, some economic sanctions) The stick in the carrot -vs- stick metaphor2. Sof – persuasive, friendly or more neutral actions (ex some economic sanctions, diplomacy, political pressures, etc) Carrot!4. Central Problems to be addressed1. keep world at a safe distance (Isolationism)2. more recent one has been to prevent a rise of rival power; ie, China, Russia3. General security8. 3 characteristics of different grand strategies1. defining national interests – protecting US borders, our people within our boundaries of US2. Defining global threats to US1. ex. central threat during the cold war was the Soviet Union and communism2. afer cold war is terrorist organization3. can only combat and make strategy if you understand the character of the threat and enemy is3. Choosing means1. 2 main factors between choosing1. classic choices – unilateralism and multilateralism 2. ?9. Does Obama have a Grand Strategy?1. Obama is a compromiser1. wants to carve out a middle ground between isolationists and interventionists1. why there may be some disappointment in his administration2. even worse ratings when it comes to foreign policy. Questions asto whether he has a grand strategy or not1. Isolationism1. keeping the world at a distance 2. goal is to reduce foreign interventions to avoid future commitments1. directly related to isolationists world view3. Logic: 1. american threats are minimal1. american neighbors are generally weak and lack the means to threaten military invasion of US2. security of oceans around us. Helps protect against water invasions3. america has nuclear weapons and means for nuclear strikes 2. argue that intervention should be to protect physical landmass and borders and we don't need to do that here.3. Foreign intervention, particularly military, can create threats that didn't exist before4. Our resources are scarce, and need to use them domestically, not foreignly. Strategic Recalibration: Framework for a 21 st National Security Strategy- What is the optimal US foreign policy strategy for the contemporary era?o Retrenchment – see limited global threats on one hand and prioritize domestic concerns on the other.o Re-Assertiveness – neoconservatives – based on a bullish assessment of US power and believes that it is in the US national interest and world order for the US to be the dominant nation.- The US must have a strategy of recalibration of geopolitical, economic, technological, other dynamics.o Should include a re-appraisal of US interests, re-assessment of US power, and re-positioning of a leadership role to better fit our changing strategic environment.o o Strategic recalibration should not be a full action plan, but rather should be a framework that provides coherence and cohesiveness through an overall strategy, while still being sufficiently flexible to apply in different challenges as they arise.- 3 Problems in Domestic Debateso Declinism – by posing so many issues of who the US is and what it is doing to itself, we become unwilling to recognize how must the strategic landscape has changed. “Effectivestrategy requires a clear-eyed assessment of the world as it is, not as it was.”o US Leadership – critics of the 2010 National Security Strategy stated that the President was not providing global leadership. However, international politics is much more complicated than simply having the US lead and other States following or getting out of the way – there is much more of a flexible, changing dynamic.o US Exceptionalism – ideas of the US being the “city on the Hill” are understandable, but tend to lead citizens to want to keep things as they currently are, “to soothe more than energize”. We need to use our sense of patriotism and pride in a way that will help American citizens move forward with global politics.- Retrenchmento Characterized by exasperation over the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and emphasizes domestic priorities during the domestic economic crisis.o Proposals for retrenchment include less defense spending, fewer overseas bases and troop deployments, less use of military force, and generally pulling back from being overextended.o Largely defined in “do less” terms rather than “do different” termso The US is simply too interconnected in too many ways with too many countries and international organizations, to stand apart in the way that proponents of retrenchment advocate.- Re-Assertivenesso While retrenchments wants the US to do less in the world, re-assertiveness pushes for the US to do more.o Problems with this theory: Power-influence gap: the possession of resources of power (e.g. US still has strongest military) does not have enough influence over other international actors, and does not necessarily ensure favorable policy outcomes.o With the world having much less of a shared and central threat, our military superiority is less convertible to other forms of power which are currently more useful for other countries. States are re-defining their own foreign policies and principles to better reflect their own national interests and