,
19 tweets,
7 min read
Read on Twitter
I'll admit: @realDonaldTrump raises a legitimate issue 👇
Why does the US take responsibility for protecting shipping in the Gulf and what does this say about the US role in the world?
[THREAD]
Why does the US take responsibility for protecting shipping in the Gulf and what does this say about the US role in the world?
[THREAD]
For context, @MEaglen highlights how the US protecting shipping lanes, open skies, etc, has been essential to the functioning of a stable global economy
And @SevaUT points out that maintaining a thriving and expanding global economy has been an essential feature of US post-Cold War foreign policy
Notice I used the words "has been".
Couldn't those goals still be accomplished if other country's were responsible for maintaining open shipping lanes in the Gulf (or even elsewhere)?
Couldn't those goals still be accomplished if other country's were responsible for maintaining open shipping lanes in the Gulf (or even elsewhere)?
@dmedelstein rightly highlights how other countries, especially China, would likely step in to offer the same protection
...but he also points out that this is not a "free lunch" for the US
Indeed, allowing others to take on the responsibility of maintaining stability in the Persian Gulf (and the broader Middle East region) would go against decades of US policy.
Consider...
Consider...
"The Middle East is an area in which the United States has a vital interest. The maintenance of peace in that area, which has so frequently seen disturbances in the past, is of significance to the world as a whole."
That was FDR
That was FDR
"But if we just stand by, they’ll [the Soviets] will move into Iran and they’ll take over the whole Middle East There’s no telling what they’ll do, if we don’t put up a fight now"
That was Truman
That was Truman
"Let our position be absolutely clear: An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America"
That's Jimmy Carter, following the USSR invasion of Afghanistan
That's Jimmy Carter, following the USSR invasion of Afghanistan
And Jimmy went on to say, "and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force"
Recall that this is someone who won the @NobelPrize for Peace!
Recall that this is someone who won the @NobelPrize for Peace!
Bill Clinton pretty much echoed Carter: "Our paramount national security interest in the Middle East is maintaining the unhindered flow of oil from the Persian Gulf to world markets at stable prices"
Indeed, this is a useful frame for understanding both the Persian Gulf War and the invasion of Iraq -- remove what was perceived as a destabilizing force from the region
In case you think these are just random justifications made consistently by various US presidents, the goal of maintaining US global and regional primacy was embodied in the 1992 Defense Planning Guidance
nsarchive2.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb2…
nsarchive2.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb2…
The document is pretty clear:
"Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival. This...requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power."
"Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival. This...requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power."
As @HalBrands points out in this terrifically useful @TXNatSecReview piece, the ideas expressed in the 1992 DPG has remained a pillar of US foreign policy since the end of the Cold War
tnsr.org/2018/02/choosi…
tnsr.org/2018/02/choosi…
To me, this all comes down to a basic question: does the US want to be a Kindleberger/Gilpin hegemon or not?
If the answer is "yes", then the "Spider-man Rule" applies
Again, @realDonaldTrump highlights an important issue that raises a fundamental question about the US role in the world.
Does the US want to stay hegemonic, or not?
[END]
Does the US want to stay hegemonic, or not?
[END]
