The Belgravia Dispatch: Grand Strategy Musings as Deflated Souffle

July 22, 2007

Grand Strategy Musings as Deflated Souffle

I've just waded through over 12,000 words this Sunday morning to learn, well, that great power politics still exist, the U.S. is still big boy on the block, and (rest assured) that we can still kick around any bad guys push come to shove.

The piece closes with a grave admonishment that the "era of grand expectations" is over and done with. Why, you don't say? And not a trace of irony in this grim closing, eh, perhaps accompanied by a serious acknowledgment of the growing debacle that is American policy in the Middle East, cheer-led by many of the author's intimates?

To be frank, I feel like I've just had to suffer through a badly botched souffle, brimming over and soggily capsizing under the weight of its warmed-over fare (power politics still live on! the world looks different from Moscow than it does from Washington!), over-used nostrums ("the return of great power and great games"!, expectations ain't what they used to be!), among other trotting out of group-think cliches. Can't we do better in our 'elite' discourse?

P.S. There is a bonus section on how to deal with Islamic extremists: "If retreat is impossible, perhaps the best course is to advance. Of the many bad options in confronting this immensely dangerous problem, the best may be to hasten the process of modernization in the Islamic world: more modernization, more globalization, faster."

A riveting apercu! Perhaps a 'faster, please' might be tossed in too, followed, say, by a 'heh, indeed!'

Posted by Gregory at July 22, 2007 02:33 PM

Comments

I like to thank Greg for reading Kagen's manifesto for the Hoover Institute so we don't have to.

Posted by: p_lukasiak at July 22, 2007 04:00 PM | Permalink to this comment

As usual in these rantings about foreign policy and geopolitics, the game is portrayed simply as "king of the hill,' and the players behave as young adolescents fighting for spots on the pecking order.

It would be refreshing for once to read an analysis that dealt with the real underlying issues: economics and resources.

Kagan apparently entirely misses the fact that the West and Japan are running out of oil and natural gas, and are increasingly dependent on a few producers who have increased their power enormously over the last few years. Plus China has emerged with a trillion dollar portfolio mostly held in dollars, a debt that has allowed Washington to pursue its foreign adventures on the cheap.

Yet Kagan insists that the U.S. remains in the catbird seat, mostly because we articulate better values than our rivals, despite what our behavior actually says about us.

Posted by: JohnH at July 22, 2007 10:22 PM | Permalink to this comment

Ah Yes, the Kagans can always be counted on to play Wagner though a kazoo.

I love the smell of C-span2 in the morning, smells like victory!

Posted by: DonkeyKong at July 23, 2007 06:43 AM | Permalink to this comment

By any rational, empirical analysis, the US role in the Middle East is not a "debacle." I know you want it to be (not because you are anti-American, but because you are anti-Bush and want to hang that albatross around his neck), but saying it doesn't make it so.

You can seriously argue about the current state and trajectory of affairs in the region, but "debacle" is simply too strong a word. It is a polemic, not an analytic.

Posted by: Moqui at July 24, 2007 06:37 PM | Permalink to this comment

Mind you, I am not saying things are good. You can seriously argue about the current state and trajectory of affairs in the region, but "debacle" is simply too strong a word. It is a polemic, not an analytic.

Posted by: Moqui at July 24, 2007 06:38 PM | Permalink to this comment

Sure, the US role is not a debacle. There may be hundreds of dead showing up on the streets of the major cities of Iraq every morning, and our favorite Saudi dictatorship may be in some danger of slipping (and destroying our economy), and the our favorite Egyptian military dictatorship may be losing ground to democracy, and our favorite Jordanian dictatorship may have problems with struggling democracy, and the US may be hated from one end of the Moslem world (Magrib) to the other (Indonesia), and our favorite Pakistani strongman thug may be in danger of losing to democracy, and the US may be widely regarded as a terrorist nation, but, its no debacle -- it is a collection of very deliberate (if stupid) choices.

A debacle would be if.... the US were publically caught torturing Moslems? Um, No. If the US were proven to be killing innocent Moslems? Um, No. If the US were publically caught funding more Moslem terrorists by Turkey? Um, No. If the US were caughting funding Salafi terrorists in Anbar? Um, No. If the US were caughting funding Salafi terrorists in northern Iran? Um, No.

There can be no debacle, until the Decider Decides it is a Debacle. Otherwise, it is not a Debacle, because only the Decider Decides.

Posted by: John Connor at July 25, 2007 02:53 PM | Permalink to this comment

Freddy Kagan is proof-positive of the need for waterboarding in this country.

Somebody get the plywood. I'll hook up the hose.

Posted by: John P. Normanson at July 26, 2007 02:20 PM | Permalink to this comment

	« Hold Forever, or Gradually Fold? \| Main \| You Voted Wrong, See? » July 22, 2007 Grand Strategy Musings as Deflated Souffle I've just waded through over 12,000 words this Sunday morning to learn, well, that great power politics still exist, the U.S. is still big boy on the block, and (rest assured) that we can still kick around any bad guys push come to shove. The piece closes with a grave admonishment that the "era of grand expectations" is over and done with. Why, you don't say? And not a trace of irony in this grim closing, eh, perhaps accompanied by a serious acknowledgment of the growing debacle that is American policy in the Middle East, cheer-led by many of the author's intimates? To be frank, I feel like I've just had to suffer through a badly botched souffle, brimming over and soggily capsizing under the weight of its warmed-over fare (power politics still live on! the world looks different from Moscow than it does from Washington!), over-used nostrums ("the return of great power and great games"!, expectations ain't what they used to be!), among other trotting out of group-think cliches. Can't we do better in our 'elite' discourse? P.S. There is a bonus section on how to deal with Islamic extremists: "If retreat is impossible, perhaps the best course is to advance. Of the many bad options in confronting this immensely dangerous problem, the best may be to hasten the process of modernization in the Islamic world: more modernization, more globalization, faster." A riveting apercu! Perhaps a 'faster, please' might be tossed in too, followed, say, by a 'heh, indeed!' Posted by Gregory at July 22, 2007 02:33 PM Comments I like to thank Greg for reading Kagen's manifesto for the Hoover Institute so we don't have to. Posted by: p_lukasiak at July 22, 2007 04:00 PM \| Permalink to this comment As usual in these rantings about foreign policy and geopolitics, the game is portrayed simply as "king of the hill,' and the players behave as young adolescents fighting for spots on the pecking order. It would be refreshing for once to read an analysis that dealt with the real underlying issues: economics and resources. Kagan apparently entirely misses the fact that the West and Japan are running out of oil and natural gas, and are increasingly dependent on a few producers who have increased their power enormously over the last few years. Plus China has emerged with a trillion dollar portfolio mostly held in dollars, a debt that has allowed Washington to pursue its foreign adventures on the cheap. Yet Kagan insists that the U.S. remains in the catbird seat, mostly because we articulate better values than our rivals, despite what our behavior actually says about us. Posted by: JohnH at July 22, 2007 10:22 PM \| Permalink to this comment Ah Yes, the Kagans can always be counted on to play Wagner though a kazoo. I love the smell of C-span2 in the morning, smells like victory! Posted by: DonkeyKong at July 23, 2007 06:43 AM \| Permalink to this comment By any rational, empirical analysis, the US role in the Middle East is not a "debacle." I know you want it to be (not because you are anti-American, but because you are anti-Bush and want to hang that albatross around his neck), but saying it doesn't make it so. You can seriously argue about the current state and trajectory of affairs in the region, but "debacle" is simply too strong a word. It is a polemic, not an analytic. Posted by: Moqui at July 24, 2007 06:37 PM \| Permalink to this comment By any rational, empirical analysis, the US role in the Middle East is not a "debacle." I know you want it to be (not because you are anti-American, but because you are anti-Bush and want to hang that albatross around his neck), but saying it doesn't make it so. Mind you, I am not saying things are good. You can seriously argue about the current state and trajectory of affairs in the region, but "debacle" is simply too strong a word. It is a polemic, not an analytic. Posted by: Moqui at July 24, 2007 06:38 PM \| Permalink to this comment Sure, the US role is not a debacle. There may be hundreds of dead showing up on the streets of the major cities of Iraq every morning, and our favorite Saudi dictatorship may be in some danger of slipping (and destroying our economy), and the our favorite Egyptian military dictatorship may be losing ground to democracy, and our favorite Jordanian dictatorship may have problems with struggling democracy, and the US may be hated from one end of the Moslem world (Magrib) to the other (Indonesia), and our favorite Pakistani strongman thug may be in danger of losing to democracy, and the US may be widely regarded as a terrorist nation, but, its no debacle -- it is a collection of very deliberate (if stupid) choices. A debacle would be if.... the US were publically caught torturing Moslems? Um, No. If the US were proven to be killing innocent Moslems? Um, No. If the US were publically caught funding more Moslem terrorists by Turkey? Um, No. If the US were caughting funding Salafi terrorists in Anbar? Um, No. If the US were caughting funding Salafi terrorists in northern Iran? Um, No. There can be no debacle, until the Decider Decides it is a Debacle. Otherwise, it is not a Debacle, because only the Decider Decides. :) Posted by: John Connor at July 25, 2007 02:53 PM \| Permalink to this comment Freddy Kagan is proof-positive of the need for waterboarding in this country. Somebody get the plywood. I'll hook up the hose. Posted by: John P. Normanson at July 26, 2007 02:20 PM \| Permalink to this comment		About Belgravia Dispatch Gregory Djerejian, an international lawyer and business executive, comments intermittently on global politics, finance & diplomacy at this site. The views expressed herein are solely his own and do not represent those of any organization. More About the Author Email the Author Recent Entries Lunch w/ the FT... Robert Strange McNamara Biden on Israel/Iran Mea Culpa (Part II) Something of A Mea Culpa Search Search this site: The News Financial Times New York Times Wall Street Journal The Economist The Times The Spectator Daily Telegraph The New Yorker Washington Post New Criterion New Republic National Review The Atlantic The American Conservative Harpers The Week The Guardian Weekly Standard The Nation Real Clear Politics Le Figaro Le Monde El Pais Pravda The Blogs Across the Aisle Marc Ambinder American Footprints The American Scene Bainbridge Jack Balkin Becker-Posner Balloon Juice Steve Clemons Juan Cole The Corner Crooked Timber Cunning Realist Democracy Arsensal Daniel Drezner Washington Monthly James Fallows Glenn Greenwald Nikolas Gvosdev Huffington Post Mark Kleiman Joshua Landis Daniel Larison Marc Lynch Josh Marshall Progressive Realist Obsidian Wings George Packer Gideon Rachman Andrew Sullivan Katrina vanden Heuvel Volokh Conspiracy Steve Walt James Wolcott Matthew Yglesias Foreign Affairs Commentariat Foreign Affairs Foreign Policy Le Monde Diplomatique National Interest Law & Finance Barron's Bloomberg Bull and Bear Wise Calculated Risk Marketwatch Contrary Investor Corporate Counsel Blog DealBreaker Deal Lawyers Blog Financial Sense Forbes Fortune Hussman Funds Bruce MacEwen Barry Ritholz Nouriel Roubini Safe Haven SCOTUS Blog Seeking Alpha The Street 10b-5 Daily Yahoo Finance Think Tanks AEI Baker Institute Brookings Carnegie Cato CFR CSIS Heritage IISS Intl Crisis Group USIP Security Janes Fed. American Scientists Defense Tech Global Security Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Books American Scholar LRB NYRB NYT Book Review Paris Review TLS Granta Grand Street Arts & Letters Daily TNR's The Book The City Curbed Eater Gothamist NY Magazine NY Post NY Press New York Observer Tribeca Trib Vanishing NY Village Voice Epicurean Corner Wine Terroirs The Burgundy Report Richard Kelley Andrew Jefford Archives Browse Archives Syndicate this site: Belgravia Dispatch Maintained by: www.vikeny.com Powered by

	© 2010 Belgravia Dispatch