Analysis & Opinions - Foreign Policy
Europe's Future Is as China's Enemy
If NATO were a listed stock, would now be a good time to short it? According to the New York Times, U.S. President Donald Trump has told his aides repeatedly that he would like to withdraw the United States from the alliance. The U.S. foreign-policy establishment promptly got the vapors at this news, with former Undersecretary of Defense Michèle Flournoy declaring that such a step "would destroy 70-plus years of painstaking work across multiple administrations, Republican and Democratic, to create perhaps the most powerful and advantageous alliance in history." Even though NATO's original rationale evaporated when the Soviet Union imploded, it continues to be the most sacred of cows inside America's policy elite.
But Trump isn't the real problem, even though his vulgar, vain, erratic, and needlessly offensive behavior has made a difficult situation worse and to no apparent benefit. Rather, the real problem began as soon as the Soviet Union collapsed because it removed the principle rationale for a deep U.S. commitment to European security....
Want to Read More?
The full text of this publication is available via the original publication source.
For more information on this publication:
Belfer Communications Office
For Academic Citation:
Walt, Stephen M.“Europe's Future Is as China's Enemy.” Foreign Policy, January 22, 2019.
- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Analysis & Opinions
- The National Interest
Déjà Vu? 'Global Britain' Versus the Continental Commitment
Analysis & Opinions
- Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies
Is Trump Right to Demand that NATO Partners Pay More?
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Policy Brief
- Quarterly Journal: International Security
The Future of U.S. Nuclear Policy: The Case for No First Use
Discussion Paper
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Why the United States Should Spread Democracy
If NATO were a listed stock, would now be a good time to short it? According to the New York Times, U.S. President Donald Trump has told his aides repeatedly that he would like to withdraw the United States from the alliance. The U.S. foreign-policy establishment promptly got the vapors at this news, with former Undersecretary of Defense Michèle Flournoy declaring that such a step "would destroy 70-plus years of painstaking work across multiple administrations, Republican and Democratic, to create perhaps the most powerful and advantageous alliance in history." Even though NATO's original rationale evaporated when the Soviet Union imploded, it continues to be the most sacred of cows inside America's policy elite.
But Trump isn't the real problem, even though his vulgar, vain, erratic, and needlessly offensive behavior has made a difficult situation worse and to no apparent benefit. Rather, the real problem began as soon as the Soviet Union collapsed because it removed the principle rationale for a deep U.S. commitment to European security....
Want to Read More?
The full text of this publication is available via the original publication source.- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Analysis & Opinions - The National Interest
Déjà Vu? 'Global Britain' Versus the Continental Commitment
Analysis & Opinions - Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies
Is Trump Right to Demand that NATO Partners Pay More?
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Policy Brief - Quarterly Journal: International Security
The Future of U.S. Nuclear Policy: The Case for No First Use
Discussion Paper - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Why the United States Should Spread Democracy


