It has been astonishing to watch seasoned US foreign policy hands continue to cling the same failing strategies, whether it’s the war in Afghanistan or engagement with China.
Bob Zoellick and Richard Haass both recently argued in the WSJ for continued engagement with China, pushing a case that made sense 15 years ago but doesn’t hold up today.
wsj.com/articles/the-u…
wsj.com/articles/dont-…
wsj.com/articles/the-u…
wsj.com/articles/dont-…
The Zoellick & Haass China articles pair nicely with this Dave Petraeus Washington Post op-ed a few months ago arguing to stay the course in Afghanistan. It’s like a time machine back to 2004.
washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/…
washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/…
These policies have been failures. They did not achieve their aims. That doesn’t mean that they were 100% failures, that U.S. engagement with China or involvement in Afghanistan has yielded *nothing*. But, writ large, the policies did not have the intended outcomes.
In many instances, U.S. failed to achieve its foreign policy objectives because it assumed another actor would change their preferences: CCP, Taliban, Pakistan, Putin, etc. And, lo and behold, it turns out that others have their own interests and don’t always align with America’s
It is unfortunate that these policies failed but not a disaster. America is strong and can adapt and recover, but only if we see the world as it is.
American foreign policy cannot recover if it continues to be based on the delusion that other actors will change their interests to align with our wishes.
These foreign policy failures, as massive as they are, are recoverable but only if we acknowledge that the current U.S. approach isn’t working and adjust course. American foreign policy will continue to be hobbled if we can’t learn from our mistakes.
