Grand Strategy

There is an old truism that goes, "where you stand depends on where you sit." This was the case for former Treasury Secretary and former Goldman Sachs chief Robert Rubin and his policy of "Rubinomics" that elevated a few short- and medium-term macro indicators (e.g. annual budget deficit, Fed Funds Rate, S&P 500, etc.) above long-term economic health.

Similarly, his successor, current Treasury Secretary and also former Goldman Sachs chief, Hank Paulson. In Paulson's case, stability of the macroeconomic status quo is the highest priority and thoughts of longer-term, broad-based domestic prosperity are given short shrift.

If you're a banker in Wall Street these policies make complete sense. If you're the next President of the United States, however, that kind of narrow thinking is insufficient.

That is a long introduction to my critique of T. Boone Pickens' new energy plan. In today's Wall Street Journal, the renowned oil executive offered up his plan to, as he puts it, "escape the grip of foreign oil." While Pickens' proposals rightly establish the scale of the problem -- "Now our country faces what I believe is the most serious situation since World War II" -- the package of solutions is clearly designed by an Energy executive, and is not ready for consideration by the next president.

I've been reading with some fascination the conversation by my friends over at the National Security Network's blog, Democracy Arsenal. If I am reading their meaning correctly, three consecutive posts on U.S. grand strategy are arguing that the essence of progressive grand strategy is about the U.S. becoming a conservative power.

Starting with Ilan Goldenberg at NSN and followed by Shawn Brimley of CNAS and David Shorr of the Stanley Foundation, all three say this pretty clearly:

A shout out to my colleague Sherle Schwenninger who reminded me that Harvard's Sarah Sewall has a new national security strategy paper making the rounds.

Sewall was the deputy assistant secretary of defense for peacekeeping and humanitarian assistance and is now director of the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at Harvard. I met Sarah ten years ago when she was at the American Academy of Arts and Sciences up in Cambridge. I was a grad student doing research on conflict prevention and she was leading a program on the International Criminal Court. Sewall, of course, is in the inner circles of two important people right now. One is General David Petraeus, the other is Senator Barack Obama. It's an extremely important relationship that the intense partisanship of the last two years has threatened in a dangerous way. But I digress.

My friend Siobahn Gorman over at the Wall Street Journal covered the new National Intelligence Assessment on Global Climate Change today. Here's the article.

In summarizing the NIA for Congress, Tom Fingar, the head of the National Intelligence Council who spoke here at New America a few weeks ago, said global climate change is a very real national security challenge. Here's his summary graf:

We judge global climate change will have wide-ranging implications for US national security interests over the next 20 years. Although the United States will be less affected and is better equipped than most nations to deal with climate change, and may even see a benefit owing to increases in agriculture productivity, infrastructure repair and replacement will be costly. We judge that the most significant impact for the United States will be indirect and result from climate-driven effects on many other countries and their potential to seriously affect US national security interests.

All in all, I think the statement by Fingar is solid first look at the issue by an Intelligence Community that is trying hard to get a handle on a powerful geopolitical force that requires untraditional collection and analysis.

As the Weekly Standard editor, Bill Kristol, just joked, today's Pivot Point conference hosted by the Center for a New American Security is the greatest gathering of strategic firepower since Richard Holbrooke dined alone.

Billed as a conversation about American grand strategy, the first panel, entitled, "A New U.S. Grand Strategy" amounted to not the presentation of a new grand strategy but, an admission that these panelists hold little hope for finding one. The message of this panel, from Harvard's Joe Nye to Bill Kristol and all the speakers in between is that the world is complex and that here is no obvious singular organizing principle like we had in the Cold War. Therefore, says CNAS President and Co-Founder Michele Flournoy, the best we can do is to set out an attractive vision of the world we seek and deal with the complexity in the world out there.

(Kishore Mahbubani speaks at New America Foundation reception on the "Rise of Asia and the Decline of the West. Pictured are Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Robert Kimmitt, Kishore Mahbubani, and New America Foundation/American Strategy Program Director Steve Clemons. photo credit: Samuel Sherraden)

My boss Steve Clemons is hosting a fascinating debate on the future of the international order over at his blog, The Washington Note. The debate is between some of the day's leading geopolitical thinkers, including Kishore Mahbubani, G. John Ikenberry, and Anne-Marie Slaughter. With that kind of fire power, I hesitate to step into the fray, but since I've been asked, here are my two cents:

The Associated Press (05/ 13) quotes Daniel Levy on the state of the Middle East peace process.
Foreign Policy in Focus (05/12) cites William Hartung on lessons learned in the Iraq War.
The New York Observer (05/12) mentions Parag Khanna in a discussion of the state of US hegemony.
World Politics Review (05/12) cites Flynt Leverett on China-US tensions.
US News (05/09) quotes Steve Clemons on Hillary Clinton's fading political future.

Pacific Daily News (05/07) analyzes Parag Khanna's hypothesis of the decline of U.S. hegemony.
US News (05/06) quotes Sherle Schwenninger on the cost of doing business in the U.S.
AFP (05/06) cites Steve Clemons discussing the negative impact of Clinton's comments on Iran.
Hard News (05/06) discusses Peter Bergen's research on the link between education and terrorist recruitment.
The People's Daily (04/25) quotes Steve Clemons arguing against a boycott of the Beijing Games.

Senator Chuck Hagel on a Realist Internationalism for the 21st Century

Sen. Chuck Hagel, Steven Clemons, and American Strategy Program Director's Council Chair Rita Hauser at a recent Salon hosted by Clemons and the New America Foundation.

Former serviceman, businessman, and long-serving politician, Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) contributes a wealth of personal experience on America’s most pressing issues from the domestic economy to political divisions to the Iraq war. The self-proclaimed patriot is not afraid to question the nation’s current status, recent policy debacles and future prospects. America: Our Next Chapter is a tough but optimistic letter from one concerned citizen to the rest of America.

Click on the player below to watch this event LIVE at 12:00 pm on April 30, 2008.

Steve Clemons, director of the American Strategy Program here at the New America Foundation held a media conference call Friday with George Soros to discuss his new book, New Paradigm for Financial Markets: The Credit Crisis of 2008 and What It Means. The book is available in electronic form, here. To listen to the MP3 of the call, click here.

In the book, Soros examines the financial roots of the current financial crisis and what to do about it. After the call on Friday, my colleague Sam Sherraden looked at Soros' market analysis and policy prescriptions in this special edition of Global Economic Snapshot. I will take a little more time to examine the geopolitical roots of the crisis, focusing on his concept of the Superbubble and extracting some strategic lessons for the United States.

Bubble of Damocles