MM#267--American Foreign Policy Trilogy--part 1

Welcome to the Theory to Action podcast, where we examine the timeless treasures of wisdom from the great books in less time, to help you take action immediately and ultimately to create and lead a flourishing life. Now here's your host, david Kaiser Hello.

I am David and welcome back to another Mojo Minute and because of the success of last week's COVID trilogy, which I got a ton of feedback on, I have tabled what our current lineup is for this week and we're going to take another deep dive into another interest of mine and hopefully yours, which is American or US foreign policy. And we're doing this as well because this week we honor the sacrifices of those who fought in the war on terror and those victims who lost their lives on the attacks of September 11, 2001. Now Americans foreign policy decisions have been suspect over the last 20 some years. So in this trilogy of sorts similar to the COVID trilogy, or similar to the COVID tragedy rather, we have all witnessed over the course of the last three years, we are posing to ourselves what are some of the best? This question, what are some of the best books to cover American foreign policy and what have we learned? We will try to answer that question. Most importantly, in addition to researching and diving deep into these books, we're going to try and do something new with our trilogy week. We're going to ask ourselves the tough questions in hopes of moving the conversation down the road a bit and improving our lives with a better understanding and better knowledge to ultimately try and live a flourishing life by discovering the truth about our direction and foreign policy. Usually, asking the tough questions will reveal the truth in most in its most raw and unaltered orated form when we like getting to that spot. It may be uncomfortable, we may not like it, but if it's very close to the truth we will take that. No one likes to be lied to so often and our national leaders want to lie to us to cover something up. Usually they think the American people can't handle the truth and we are taking the approach that you should give us the full truth. Tell us the full truth and we will handle the truth collectively as a country, just fine. It's when our national leaders lie and cover up that truth, when they whitewash the history is when we get fed up with our national leaders. So with that quick introduction and setting the stage for our week, let's find out what books we will cover this week and ask ourselves roughly three difficult questions about our foreign policy and then try to answer those questions from the books we read over the course of the week. Our first book that we're going to cover is the Four Ages of American Foreign Policy Great Power, superpower, hyperpower by Michael Mandelbaum, and our second book is Cabool, the untold story of Biden's fiasco and the American Warriors who fought to end it, by Jerry Dunleavy and James Hasson. Our third book is the Russo-Ukrainian War the Return of History, by Sergei Polki, and we're going to have two bonus books that we will touch on briefly. We're going to sprinkle these into our reviews on Thursday and Saturday. How the West brought war to Ukraine. Understanding how US and NATO policies led to crisis, war in the risk of nuclear catastrophe, by Benjamin Ablau, abloh, rather. And the final book is Sledgehammer. How the Breaking with the Past Brought Peace to the Middle East, by David Friedman. Thank you, so those are our books. Now, getting back to our general topic of American foreign policy, let's at least agree collectively that September 11, 2001 was when we had a dramatic change to our foreign policy, and that had to happen. The world changed dramatically on that date, very similar to the Japanese sneak attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941 that kicked off US involvement in the Second World War. September 11, 2001 did the same thing. Now I think it's important that we give ourselves a good initial sketch of US foreign policy over the past 250 years, albeit a quick sketch, so doing a brief overview of our first book will get us to that point. Foreign policy is a complex issue that requires a multidisciplinary approach to thoroughly tackle all the intricacies. The United States' role as a dominant player in the international arena since World War II further amplifies the importance of examining foreign policy. After all, if we're going to live a flourishing life, we certainly don't want our sons and daughters or husbands and wives to be somewhere else around the world risking their life. If they are, we want it to be for a good, demonstrable reason. Sometimes we have not always had a good reason to do that. We want to explore where that line is at Now. Today we're going to explore American's foreign policy using the insights from Michael Mandebaume's the Four Ages of American Foreign Policy Weak power, great power, superpower and hyper power. So with that let's go to the book the First Age Weak Power, which has characterized the period between the 10 years before the Revolutionary War to the end of the Civil War, roughly the time periods of 1865 to 1865. Here's the quote to sum up this period from Michael's book the international system of sovereign states is sometimes compared to a jungle, and both fierce and often deadly competition takes place In jungle. Some animals, predators, stalk, kill and eat weaker ones their prey. In the international system, strong states prey on weaker ones, sometimes inflicting the political equivalent of death, the loss of sovereignty and sovereign independence. The United States began life as a weak power and spent the next 100 years in that position. In the international system, at least in comparison with its chief antagonist, great Britain, the 13 colonies originally had no effective military forces of their own and no political mechanism to coordinate their policies. On every metric of power, the British far surpassed them. Yet the United States survived continuing political friction and two full-fledged wars with its one-time colonial master. It did so by employing three principal means by which the weak can preserve their independence against the strong. Difficulty of access, active defense and the diversion of attention of the strong by rivalry with other powerful countries. As it happened, each of the three has a strong parallel in the natural world. Small, weak members of the animal kingdom avoid their predators by camouflage. Many have evolved to blend in with their surroundings. Their predators do not see them and so lack access to them. Difficulty of access in the international system comes about by virtue of geography, and here the United States has been well endowed. The world's second largest ocean separates it from the great powers of Europe. Europeans could and did cross the Atlantic, of course, but the voyage was long and uncertain. So that's a great little summary of American foreign policy and its infancy of the country. And this final nugget of wisdom is why I wanted to cover this book. I think Michael does a great job summing up American foreign policy over the first hundred years and, more importantly, giving us this upcoming nugget of wisdom. Going back to the book, finally, predators may be diverted from pursuing their prey by fighting among themselves. Predatory mammals do fight others of the same species for control of territory, access to females and food. In the international system, rivalry between and among the strong can afford the weak a respite from the dangers that the strong pose to them, and even give the weak some room to maneuver. Moreover, while intramural fighting among the big beast of the jungle is episodic, great power rivalry tends to be constant. It was so during the first hundred years of American foreign policy, and the United States took full advantage of it. Indeed, this proved to be the single most potent determinant of success that American foreign policy achieved in the country's first 50 years. Just that last sentence. What a great nugget of wisdom. Indeed, this proved to be the single most potent determinant of the success of the American foreign policy achieved in the country's first 50 years. I also thought that it was a good jungle analogy that Michael provides to help us understand how foreign policy could be viewed, especially in the early epoch of American history and moving on to the next age of Michael's book, the second age in which the United States becomes a great power, from 1865 to 1945. And here's a great pull quote from this period to sum up this time period, the United States participated in what turned out to be the last great episode of Imperial expansion, acquiring a formal empire and its immediate neighborhood to the south and to the west. In the decades after the Civil War, the country had increased its influence in these directions and in the pivotal year of 1898, it fought a war with Spain, the first of several it was to wage overseas during the succeeding 12 decades, as a result of which it took control of Cuba and Puerto Rico and the Caribbean and Hawaii and the Philippines and the Pacific. While the United States became an imperial power, its experience as an empire differed in important ways from those of its European counterparts. Two of the reoccurring features of American foreign policy marked the country's imperial experience Democracy, in the form of domestic opposition to the acquisition of overseas territories, and ideology in that Americans at least some in that Americans, some at least believed they had accepted an imperial vocation for the purpose of spreading liberty. Compared to the European empires, moreover, the American one had a short life. Finally, while the fact of empire loomed large in the histories of the great powers of Europe, it only had a very modest effect on the United States. Few Americans were involved, directly or indirectly, with the country's imperial possessions, while it had them, or placed much value on them or indeed paid any attention to them. By contrast, the relations of the United States with the other great powers had, and the first half of the 20th century, an immense impact on its national life. And here we find a great pivot point in history, especially American foreign policy, and I think Michael does a great job capturing this great nugget of wisdom. Going back to the book, in the immediate aftermath of the Civil War in 1865, the Union demobilized its military forces and had no thought of taking any part in European affairs. In the immediate aftermath of World War II. 80 years later, the United States had a powerful military forces deployed all over the world, having established a major presence in Europe and in Asia as well, both of which were destined to endure the war, both of which were destined to endure into the following century. Thus the trajectory of American global role in this period, at the outset, with the demobilization of the Union's military forces, and the United States was the least of the great powers. At the end, it had become the greatest of them, indeed so powerful that it achieved a new international status, even higher than that of a great power. That's such a great, unique and vital nugget of wisdom that Michael gives to us Now. My only criticism of this time period, which Michael misses completely, is that when America's capitalistic system kicks in, just after the Civil War, that free market system comes of age and we have, as a country, incredible growth, anywhere and everywhere during this time period are quickly gaining and ever expanding economic powers, what creates for us a huge foundation on which we do compete with the great powers of the world at the time. And, in addition, our economic system will be vitally more powerful and will essentially help us Rightly when the next great age that Michael talks about Now. This is very important to keep in the back of your mind when comparing systems and countries. So let's move on to the next epoch, the third age, and that is of a superpower. Those years are from 1945 to 1990. Let's grab that poll quote the United States emerged from World War Two with more power than ever before. It had the largest economy in the world before the war and expanded its economic activity while waging it. Its currency had gained official recognition through the Bretton Woods agreements. And the most important on the planet. As the most important on the planet, america had, as well, formidable military forces, which included the most numerous and sophisticated war machines, ships and aircraft, as well as the most destructive weapon ever devised by humans, the atomic bomb. Even that recitation fails to do full justice to the American global role in 1945. Power in the international system is relative, and World War Two had severely reduced that of the other countries that had begun it as great powers. Germany and Japan lay in ruins. France, although admitted to the winning coalition at the end, had incurred a humiliating defeat in 1940. Great Britain, while a full-fledged victor, had reached the limit of its resources by the end of the fighting. Okay. So there you go, michael actually does recognize the US economy as part of the reason why America became, and is still, one of the great superpowers in all of history. Now did you catch that super important point, that great nugget of wisdom, that of all the victors coming out of World War Two, of all the people even that participated, america was the only one that came out in the positive fashion? France, although admitted to the winning coalition at the end, had incurred a humiliating defeat in 1940. It would not be taken seriously again, great Britain, while a full-fledged victor, had reached the limit of its resources by the end of the fighting. And now here is where it gets super interesting. We're going to move on to the fourth age, the hyperpower age, from 1990 to 2015. And check out this quote from Paul Kennedy, a well-known historian. Let's go back to the book. Nothing has ever existed like this disparity of power between the United States and the rest of the world. The Pax Britannica was run on the cheap. Britain's army was much smaller than European armies, and even the Royal Navy was equal only to the next two navies Right now. All the other navies in the world combined could not dent American maritime supremacy. Charlemagne's empire was merely a Western European. In its reach, the Roman Empire stretched further afield, but there was another great empire in Persia and a larger one in China. There is therefore no comparison with America's current primacy. And again, that comes to us from Paul Kennedy, the great, well-known historian. Let's keep going with this and I'll keep quoting from the book. As with the three previous eras in the history of American foreign policy, the end of a major war ushered in the fourth. As with the Revolutionary War, the Civil War and World War II, the United States was on the winning side, and victory left it with a new, more powerful status in the international system. Unlike the other wars, the international position that the United States assumed in the wake of the Cold War was one no other country held or had ever held. After the Revolutionary War, the newly independent United States faced the challenges that confront weak states, and history furnishes many examples of such states. For the Civil War, the country joined the more exclusive but still familiar company of great powers. The outcome of World War II made America a superpower, along with its peer and competitor of the Soviet Union. In the wake of the Cold War, however, the United States had no peer. No other country had, or ever had, comparable power. America had more military power by far than any other country. In 2015, 25 years after the post-Civil War era began, american military spending still totaled 37% of all military expenditures everywhere, which made it equal to the defense budgets of the next seven largest military spenders combined. That is just fascinating. A fascinating way to look at American foreign policy and especially American power. Let's keep going further down the page. He says this Even that statistic does not fully compare the distinctiveness of the American international position. The United States not only had no powerful rivals, but also effectively had no rivals at all. This was the defining feature of the new era Of the potentially powerful members of the international system. Russia had emerged from the wreckage of the Soviet Union shorn of half the population of that communist empire, with its once mighty armed forces in ruins. China devoted only a modest part of an economy far smaller than the American one to military purposes, and the European Union, soon to expand to include the formerly communist countries of Eastern Europe, was the partner and ally of the United States. China had only a limited ability to act in a united fashion and deployed little armed might that it could use independently had it wished to do so, as it did not. So America is at its height as a hyper power. There's no other rivals anywhere else in the world, and here is where I thought we found another great nugget of wisdom. Going back to the book, before the 1990s, through many twists and turns, american international initiatives had enjoyed remarkable success. The foreign policy of the American hyperpower did not. The American experience in the post-Cold War era in fact divides it into two parts. The first, encompassing roughly the decade after the collapse of the Soviet Union, seemed to vindicate the optimism of the liberal theory of history. The global economy expanded, democracy became the most popular form of government on the planet and military rivalry among the strongest countries remained dormant, and international history turned in a different, less favorable direction. The turn began with the terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington DC on September 11, 2001. They had a familiar effect pitching the United States into three conflicts that it would not otherwise have waged Shooting wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and an expensive effort to further such assaults that came to be known as the War on Terror. The attacks of September 11 also began a decade and a half of American international setbacks In the first three eras of the country's foreign policy. The United States had achieved its major goals and expanded its power In the post-Cold War period. The American hyperpower did neither. Its failures had more than one cause. The American government made errors of policy, in part because of the absence of restraints on what it could do in the world. Other countries turned out not to share America's goals and, although far in fear and power, sound ways to keep the hyperpower from achieving these goals. And finally, some of what the United States sought to achieve, above all the spread of democracy, lay beyond its power, or indeed that of any country, no matter how mighty to bring about and that is a very important nugget right there no matter, finally, some of what the United States sought to achieve, above all the spread of democracy, lay beyond its power, or indeed that of any country, no matter how mighty, to bring it about. So in our first book of our Twillogy All About American Foreign Policy, I thought it proper that we get a good overall sketch of the US foreign policy with Mandelbaum's book the Four Ages of American Foreign Policy Weak Power, great Power, superpower and Hyperpower. Again, the author is Michael Mandelbaum. Now, in our next episode, we're going to dig into the tough questions that we should be asking ourselves about our own foreign policy. We will start with three of them right now, and I'm going to ask you to ponder these into our next episode. Can we rightfully label the Founding Fathers as proponents of isolationism? And can we compare, and should we compare, the Founders' visions and ideas of American foreign policy to how we should conduct our foreign policy in the 21st century? Why or why not? It's an important question. It's a hard question. Number two do international organizations such as the United States and the League of Nations align with the Founders' perceptions of American foreign policy? And number three how could the United States, meddling in the politics of another country, infringe upon the rights of its own American citizens? And where I'm going with that question is what insights might the Founding Fathers provide for us on America's engagement in the Ukrainian War? That's going to be our next topic for our next episode and for now, keep reading those good books and keep searching and discovering the truth.