What role should the military play in U.S. national security?
How should the United States think about the role of the military in national security?
It has become common for U.S. policymakers on both sides of the aisle to talk of withdrawal from costly conflicts abroad. But, as Paul K. MacDonald and Joseph M. Parent write, President Donald Trump has not meaningfully reduced the U.S. military footprint—and he has suffered few political consequences as a result. Tanisha M. Fazal and Sarah Kreps point out that the absence of a popular backlash to American wars reduces the pressure on politicians to end them. A series of failed attempts at regime change should be enough to teach U.S. leaders the folly of intervention, Philip H. Gordon writes—whereas Richard Fontaine counters that the United States cannot discount military force as an instrument of foreign policy.
The problem is in the balance, former Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates argues. Washington has relied too heavily on military power while allowing nonmilitary tools, such as diplomacy and foreign aid, to atrophy. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton writes that the United States must take a broader view of national security. A modern defense strategy should be designed not only for missiles and insurgencies, but for disease, climate change, and geopolitical competition. This special election coverage is made possible in part by a grant from Carnegie Corporation of New York. Subscribe Today and Save 55% New Subscribers Get a Free eBook |
