Member-only story

Recurring Debates in Grand Strategy: Cornell Studies in Security Affairs

Edgar Cox

·2.3k Followers· Follow

Published in American Pendulum: Recurring Debates In U S Grand Strategy (Cornell Studies In Security Affairs)

6 min read

393 View Claps

56 Respond

Save

Listen

Grand strategy, the art and science of achieving national security objectives, has been the subject of ongoing debate and discussion throughout history. From the ancient Greek philosophers to modern-day policymakers, scholars and practitioners have grappled with the complex challenges of formulating and implementing grand strategies. This article explores the recurring debates in grand strategy, examining the different perspectives and approaches that have shaped the field. We will delve into the key arguments and criticisms of each approach, providing a comprehensive overview of the intellectual landscape of grand strategy and highlighting the ongoing debates and challenges in the field.

American Pendulum: Recurring Debates in U.S. Grand Strategy (Cornell Studies in Security Affairs)

by Francesco Amodeo

4.5 out of 5

Language	:	English
File size	:	1611 KB
Text-to-Speech	:	Enabled
Screen Reader	:	Supported
Enhanced typesetting	:	Enabled
Word Wise	:	Enabled
Print length	:	237 pages

Realism

Realism is one of the oldest and most influential schools of thought in grand strategy. Realists argue that the international system is anarchic, meaning that there is no overarching authority to enforce rules or laws. As a result, states must rely on their own power to protect their interests. Realists believe that states are rational actors that seek to maximize their power and security. They argue that cooperation between states is difficult to achieve and that conflict is inevitable. Some of the key assumptions of realism include:

The international system is anarchic.
States are the primary actors in the international system.
States are rational actors that seek to maximize their power and security.
Cooperation between states is difficult to achieve.
Conflict is inevitable.

Realism has been criticized for being too pessimistic and for ignoring the role of non-state actors in the international system. However, it remains a powerful and influential school of thought in grand strategy. Some of the most prominent realist scholars include Thucydides, Niccolò Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes, and Henry Kissinger.

Liberalism

Liberalism is another major school of thought in grand strategy. Liberals argue that the international system is not inherently anarchic and that cooperation between states is possible. Liberals believe that states are not simply power-maximizing actors, but that they also have interests in peace, prosperity, and justice. Liberals argue that international institutions can help to promote cooperation and reduce conflict. Some of the key assumptions of liberalism include:

The international system is not inherently anarchic.
States are not simply power-maximizing actors.
Cooperation between states is possible.
International institutions can help to promote cooperation and reduce conflict.

Liberalism has been criticized for being too optimistic and for ignoring the role of power in international relations. However, it remains a powerful and influential school of thought in grand strategy. Some of the most prominent liberal scholars include Immanuel Kant, Woodrow Wilson, and John Rawls.

Constructivism

Constructivism is a more recent school of thought in grand strategy. Constructivists argue that the international system is not objective, but rather is socially constructed by the interactions of states. Constructivists believe that states' identities, interests, and norms are shaped by their interactions with other states. Constructivists argue that cooperation between states is possible if states can develop shared identities and norms. Some of the key assumptions of constructivism include:

The international system is not objective, but rather is socially constructed.
States' identities, interests, and norms are shaped by their interactions with other states.
Cooperation between states is possible if states can develop shared identities and norms.

Constructivism has been criticized for being too idealistic and for ignoring the role of material factors in international relations. However, it remains a powerful and influential school of thought in grand strategy. Some of the most prominent constructivist scholars include Alexander Wendt, Martha Finnemore, and Kathryn Sikkink.

Postmodernism

Postmodernism is a more recent school of thought in grand strategy. Postmodernists argue that the traditional concepts of grand strategy are no longer relevant in the contemporary world. Postmodernists believe that the international system is too complex and interconnected for any one state to achieve its objectives through grand strategy. Postmodernists argue that we need to develop new ways of thinking about grand strategy that are more inclusive and responsive to the challenges of the 21st century. Some of the key assumptions of postmodernism include:

The traditional concepts of grand strategy are no longer relevant in the contemporary world.
The international system is too complex and interconnected for any one state to achieve its objectives through grand strategy.
We need to develop new ways of thinking about grand strategy that are more inclusive and responsive to the challenges of the 21st century.

Postmodernism has been criticized for being too relativistic and for providing no clear guidance for policymakers. However, it remains a powerful and influential school of thought in grand strategy. Some of the most prominent postmodernist scholars include Michel Foucault, Jean Baudrillard, and Judith Butler.

The recurring debates in grand strategy reflect the complex and challenging nature of international relations. There is no easy way to achieve national security objectives, and there is no one-size-fits-all approach to grand strategy. The best approach to grand strategy will vary depending on the specific circumstances. However, by understanding the different perspectives and approaches to grand strategy, policymakers can make more informed decisions about how to protect their national interests.

American Pendulum: Recurring Debates in U.S. Grand Strategy (Cornell Studies in Security Affairs)

by Francesco Amodeo

4.5 out of 5