Journal Article - Quarterly Journal: International Security
Don't Come Home, America: The Case against Retrenchment
Summary
After sixty-five years of pursuing a grand strategy of global leadership—nearly a third of which transpired without a peer great power rival—has the time come for the United States to switch to a strategy of retrenchment? According to most security studies scholars who write on the future of U.S. grand strategy, the answer is an unambiguous yes: they argue that the United States should curtail or eliminate its overseas military presence, abolish or dramatically reduce its global security commitments, and minimize or eschew efforts to foster and lead the liberal institutional order. Thus far, the arguments for retrenchment have gone largely unanswered by international relations scholars. An evaluation of these arguments requires a systematic analysis that directly assesses the core claim of retrenchment advocates that the current “deep engagement” grand strategy is not in the national interests of the United States. This analysis shows that advocates of retrenchment radically overestimate the costs of deep engagement and underestimate its benefits. We conclude that the fundamental choice to retain a grand strategy of deep engagement after the Cold War is just what the preponderance of international relations scholarship would expect a rational, self-interested leading power in America’s position to do.
For more information on this publication:
Please contact
International Security
For Academic Citation:
Stephen G. Brooks, G. John Ikenberry, and William C. Wohlforth. “Don't Come Home, America: The Case against Retrenchment.” Quarterly Journal: International Security, vol. 37. no. 3. (Winter 2012/13): 7–51 .
- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Analysis & Opinions
- Project Syndicate
If Trump Returns
Analysis & Opinions
- Foreign Policy
Stop Worrying About Chinese Hegemony in Asia
Paper
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Addressing Russian and Chinese Cyber Threats: A Transatlantic Perspective on Threats to Ukraine and Beyond
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Book
- Simon & Schuster
SPIES: The Epic Intelligence War Between East and West
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
- The Role of Nuclear Weapons in the 21st Century
Analysis & Opinions
- Project Syndicate
What Caused the Ukraine War?
Summary
After sixty-five years of pursuing a grand strategy of global leadership—nearly a third of which transpired without a peer great power rival—has the time come for the United States to switch to a strategy of retrenchment? According to most security studies scholars who write on the future of U.S. grand strategy, the answer is an unambiguous yes: they argue that the United States should curtail or eliminate its overseas military presence, abolish or dramatically reduce its global security commitments, and minimize or eschew efforts to foster and lead the liberal institutional order. Thus far, the arguments for retrenchment have gone largely unanswered by international relations scholars. An evaluation of these arguments requires a systematic analysis that directly assesses the core claim of retrenchment advocates that the current “deep engagement” grand strategy is not in the national interests of the United States. This analysis shows that advocates of retrenchment radically overestimate the costs of deep engagement and underestimate its benefits. We conclude that the fundamental choice to retain a grand strategy of deep engagement after the Cold War is just what the preponderance of international relations scholarship would expect a rational, self-interested leading power in America’s position to do.
- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Analysis & Opinions - Project Syndicate
If Trump Returns
Analysis & Opinions - Foreign Policy
Stop Worrying About Chinese Hegemony in Asia
Paper - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Addressing Russian and Chinese Cyber Threats: A Transatlantic Perspective on Threats to Ukraine and Beyond
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Book - Simon & Schuster
SPIES: The Epic Intelligence War Between East and West
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
-The Role of Nuclear Weapons in the 21st Century
Analysis & Opinions - Project Syndicate
What Caused the Ukraine War?