Stephen Peter Rosen
The United States is now engaged in an intense dialogue about the future of its relations with its European and Asian allies. This debate has been emotional, in part because it has been cast as a morality tale. On the one hand, advocates of U.S. President Donald Trump’s “America first” agenda argue that allies have not been grateful for U.S. backing and do not deserve the protection of the United States. They believe these states do not do enough to defend themselves and may not even share American values. On the other hand, those who defend the existing alliance structure argue that the United States must be faithful to its commitments and stand by the heroic people of Ukraine and Europe against a revanchist Russia.
But the United States did not shape the global military posture that it has maintained since World War II around a morality tale. The strategy of containment that remains the basis of current U.S. posture was based on an assessment of how the United States could protect what it valued most. A better way to approach the current debate is to ask whether the assessment that led to that strategy is as valid today as it was 75 years ago. The empirical answer to that question is no. What the United States should do in response can be debated, but its actions should be based on reality.
No comments:
Post a Comment