AMERICA ADRIFT
US foreign policy is in a precarious place. It finds itself challenged from a host of different actors, in different parts of the world, on manifold issues. Most importantly, as many of you probably are aware, the US finds itself in a hegemonic struggle for power, wealth, and influence with a rising, expansionist China. This struggle will likely define US foreign policy for most, if not all, of this century. Getting the "China Challenge" right is essential for US, Indo-Pacific, and world peace and security. The stakes of this heated competition couldn't be higher.
But there's more. North Korea is pumping out missiles, showing no sign of slowing down, and has the ability to directly strike the US. Iran is a continued irritant to Washington. Transnational and domestic terror groups seek to harm US interests at home and globally. Liberal democratic values are on the wane, and the liberal international order—the raft of rules and institutions set up by the US after WWII and a key to America's success over the last 75 years—is under serious duress.
Furthermore, internal divisions and dysfunctions have only drained American power and limited the White House’s ability to cope with all of the extant foreign policy issues and problems. A polarized electorate and legislature, a hawkish Washington establishment, and an aimless post-cold war presidency have led to costly perpetual wars, America's damaged credibility and status, and an inability of US national security policymakers to think, plan, and act strategically. America is adrift and in the process of trying to figure who it is, what is wants, and what it stands for.
NON-PARTISAN, NON-IDEOLOGICAL, COMMON SENSE EXPERT ANALYSIS
Clearly, it’s a consequential time for the US. And given the stakes, understanding the 21st century global economic, political, and security environments, the connection between US domestic and international politics, and contemporary US interests and values is more important than ever. If you are interested in and would like to understand further all of these things, I have some good news. I’ve created a Substack page solely dedicated to US foreign policy.
Seemingly, it should be easier than ever, in a high-tech digitized world, to find good sources and good analysts who can shed light on American foreign policy. But that's not the case. Although there are many supposed experts and talking heads, much of the information and analysis about US foreign policy is quite shoddy. Mainstream foreign policy insight is too often biased and ideological, not often guided by empirical data, history, and rigorous research, and rarely dispensed by qualified and credentialed experts. This Substack newsletter will seek to overcome all of these pernicious failures and weaknesses in conventional analysis.
Here, you will get a steady dose of US foreign policy analysis that’s different from—and in my view, superior to—much of what is published nowadays. For instance, my work is accessible to experts and novices alike, non-partisan, not funded (and therefore not influenced) by any outside source or backer, and informed by scholarly history and international relations literatures.
I have titled this page “Realism and Restraint.” While I do not look at the world through a partisan prism, I do approach US foreign policy and international relations more generally from a particular point of view. Guided by years of studying, research, and training, I believe that a restrained US foreign policy underpinned by “realist” scholarly and intellectual insights is the best path to ensuring American security and prosperity—as well as global stability and safety. The White House, regardless of who holds the presidency, should pursue a far less militaristic and expansionist foreign policy, one that’s grounded in realistic means and ends that serve the national interest. Had the US adopted a foreign policy informed by realism and restraint over the last 30 years—in effect, the post-cold war era—Washington would have saved countless lives and dollars, have better relations with the world and an improved image and credibility, and currently be in a sounder strategic position to compete against rising challengers, like China and Russia. The themes of realism and restraint not only inform my thinking on US foreign policy but will surface again and again during the life of this newsletter.
ABOUT BRAD
Some of you may be familiar with me and my work, many of you, I'm sure, are not. Here, in brief, is my bio. I'm a scholar, teacher, writer, blogger, and consultant on international relations. I have an M.A. in foreign affairs from the University of Virginia, and a Ph.D. from The Ohio State University in political science, with an emphasis on foreign policy and security studies. I have practical, real world experience working for a DC subcontractor on international development issues. Furthermore, I've headed a think tank with my colleague Yohanes Sulaiman since 2011. I've taught international relations courses for more than a decade at Ohio State and Saint Xavier University. And I have roughly 50 publications—essays, op-eds, and journal articles—in such outlets as The National Interest, The Wall Street Journal, Global Asia, Strategic Review, and E-IR, among others. You can access my work at my academia.edu page.
Another interesting tidbit about Realism and Restraint is that it’s not written by a coastal elite, which is the usual profile of people who dominate US foreign policy debates in government, in journals like Foreign Affairs, and in the pages of The Washington Post and The New York Times. I’m a Midwesterner, I’ve attended Midwestern universities, and I currently live and work in the Midwest. My voice is exactly the kind of voice that’s routinely overlooked and dismissed in discussions about US foreign policy. A Midwestern point of view is concerned first and foremost with how politics and policy impact the lives of Americans. We don’t look at US foreign policy as a chessboard where abstract pieces are moved around without a care in the world, which stands in contrast to how Washington, the think tank establishment, and other elites see domestic and foreign policy.
