Dimitri K. Simes, Pratik Chougule, and Paul J. Saunders offer a status report on American foreign policy at The National Interest:
So far, the two presidential candidates have demonstrated contrasting foreign-policy approaches. Hillary Clinton has showcased her experience, but has shown little willingness to question the conventional wisdom. Donald Trump has offered bold approaches, but has not explained how his administration would implement them, or how they might fit into a coherent strategy.
Nevertheless, Trump’s shortcomings as a messenger do nothing to ameliorate the need for a reappraisal of U.S. foreign policy that abandons triumphalist clichés, flawed assumptions and predetermined conclusions in favor of facts and serious analysis.
An honest appraisal of the world as it is, and of U.S. interests, capabilities and options, starts with accepting that U.S. actions have exacerbated some of today’s most ominous threats. This doesn’t mean blaming America first; terrorists conduct terrorist attacks, China is asserting its power in East Asia, and Russia annexed Crimea. Yet in each case, U.S. actions have tended to turn troublesome possibilities into dangerous realities.
Don’t expect honesty from the next administration regardless of who’s elected. Or reappraisal for that matter. Successful people have a pronounced tendency to keep doing whatever they think brought them success and unsuccessful people don’t have much influence over events. We’ll keep doing the same thing over and over again until events force us to do something else.
They say that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over again and expecting different results. I’ve seen that quote variously attributed to Ben Franklin and Albert Einstein, neither of whom apparently said any such thing. The earliest attribution I’ve found is Rita Mae Brown.
I don’t know whether that’s the definition of insanity but it’s sure the definition of U. S. foreign policy.
