Strategic planning needs to be a more integral part of America's foreign policymaking. While thousands of troops are engaged in combat and homeland security concerns abound, long-term coordination of goals and resources would seem to be of paramount importance. A change in presidential administration brings the hope that strategic planning will play an elevated role in U.S. foreign policy. Can policy planners - in the Pentagon, State Department, Treasury, NSC, and National Intelligence Council - rise to the challenge?
What should the United States do after ISIS’ all-but-inevitable defeat? Despite President Donald Trump’s campaign rhetoric, the best approach is one close to the strategy the Obama administration pursued in 2016: airstrikes, raids by special operations forces, and battalion-sized U.S. forces deployed to counter specific threats.
A quarter century after the Cold War ended, critics have renewed their calls for the United States to abandon its existing grand strategy, which they contend has both cost too much in blood and treasure and delivered too little in terms of peace, prosperity, and security. John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt make this case in their article “The Case for Offshore Balancing” (July/August 2016), which charts an alternative course.