![]() Is the Czech Republic more important than the Congo when assessing the spread of China’s global influence? So, how does the U.S. ![]() homeland whether to invest in capacity for Bahrain-given the current importance of the Persian Gulf for providing energy to the world-or for Bolivia, if the green transition takes off and lithium becomes more critical than oil. ![]() national security establishment must determine whether Mexico or Moldova is more critical for the security of the U.S. commitment to Euro-Atlantic security, a re-engagement with the broader Middle East, new initiatives for sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, and the emergence of a new region-the Arctic-which is now also defined as vital for future U.S. That is why the United States will continue to play its stabilizing role in the Indo-Pacific.”īut this occurs against the backdrop of a major new U.S. What happens in this region in the 21st century will shape the trajectory of the world. security: “The Indo-Pacific is the fastest-growing region on the planet. In 2022, Secretary of State Tony Blinken identified his view of the geographic priority for U.S. It should be focused on the parts of the world that matter most for Americans’ security, prosperity, and freedom.” This is why, in May 2022, WIlliam Ruger observed that American strategists need to be able to prioritize different regions in the world “relative to our objective national interests … since it will guide how we deploy and trade-off scarce … resources.” Lissner and Rapp-Hooper thus argue that in this emerging environment, the United States will have to navigate a “more fragmented patchwork of global, regional, and domain specific orders.” Building on that theme, Elbridge Colby, who as assistant secretary of defense took the lead in drafting the 2018 National Defense Strategy, noted: “American foreign policy shouldn’t be driven by a special affinity for or “ism” about any region. Rebecca Lissner and Mara Rapp-Hooper concur: the United States “no longer has the power” to set the agenda in every part of the world. Yet the United States lacks the wherewithal to actively engage every part of the globe, running up, as Derek Reveron, Jim Cook and Ross Coffey note, against the “limits” of America’s ability to shape multiple regional security environments. With every iteration of the National Security Strategy and the National Defense Strategy, every region of the world is acknowledged as having importance to American interests. ( FPRI) - The United States defines its national security interests in global terms.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |