Political Strategy

In The Way to Win, two of the country's most accomplished political reporters explain what separates the victors from the victims in the unforgiving environment of modern presidential campaigns.

The 2020 Presidential Election is undoubtedly, the most important election of the century. Amid an onslought of senseless killings among unarmed African Americans by vigilante civilians and trigger-happy police and a pandemic which unveiled an enormous disparity in health care for African Americans, the country is being led by an incumbent Commander in Chief who appears “unbothered” by it all. In November, America is tasked with choosing its next leader - one who will be charged with salvaging what’s left of its democracy.

Perhaps one of the most influential and controversial books in history, Machiavelli’s The Prince raises issues that are still debated centuries after its publication. The theories he developed in The Prince were derived from his observation of the successes and failures of the ruling class. The Prince was designed as a practical guide for newly appointed rulers and is required reading for all persons in a position of authority who strive for grandeur in business and politics.

The US, Barry R. Posen argues in Restraint, has grown incapable of moderating its ambitions in international politics. Since the collapse of Soviet power, it has pursued a grand strategy that he calls "liberal hegemony", one that Posen sees as unnecessary, counterproductive, costly, and wasteful. Written for policymakers and observers alike, Restraint explains precisely why this grand strategy works poorly and then provides a carefully designed alternative grand strategy and an associated military strategy and force structure.

In spring of 1953, newly elected President Eisenhower sat down with his staff to discuss the state of American strategy in the Cold War. America, he insisted, needed a new approach to an urgent situation. From this meeting emerged Eisenhower's teams of "bright young fellows", charged with developing competing policies, each of which would come to shape global politics.

The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan convinced many policymakers and scholars that the United States should pull back in international affairs and that restraint should guide grand strategy. Paul D. Miller offers a tough-minded critique of this trending body of thought, arguing that US security in fact depends on active, sustained support of the international liberal order.

In The Obama Doctrine, Colin Dueck analyzes and explains what the Obama Doctrine in foreign policy actually is and maps out the competing visions on offer from the Republican Party. Dueck, a leading scholar of US foreign policy, contends it is now becoming clear that Obama's policy of international retrenchment is in large part a function of his emphasis on achieving domestic policy goals. There have been some successes in the approach, but there have also been costs.

A common thread throughout anarchism/libertarianism is the eventual arrival at some utopian, free society. The idea is that if “we” focus “our” efforts on educating individuals on economics, morality, history, etc., we can hit critical mass, abolish the State, and live happily ever after. While this “free world” is a pipe dream, it doesn’t mean that self-liberators can’t set up pockets of freedom in the here and now, despite the existence of the State. This respite from first realm tyranny is called second realm.

Christopher Hemmer examines America's grand strategic choices between 1914 and 2014 using four recurring debates in American foreign policy as lenses. First, how should the United States balance the trade-offs between working alone versus working with other states and international organizations? Second, what is the proper place of American values in foreign policy? Third, where does the strategic perimeter of the United States lie? And fourth, is time on the side of the United States or of its enemies?

Gavin reassesses the strategy of flexible response, the influence of nuclear weapons during the Berlin Crisis, the origins of and motivations for US nuclear nonproliferation policy, and how to assess the nuclear dangers we face today. Archival evidence makes it clear that decision makers were more concerned about underlying geopolitical questions than about the strategic dynamic between two nuclear superpowers.