My Authors
Read all threads
Post-cold war, the U.S. moved from an Offensive Realism strategy (protect U.S. interests at all costs) to a Liberal Hegemony strategy (promote liberal democracies globally at all costs).

We got high on our own supply.

For the US, "it was worse than a crime. It's a blunder"
According to John Mearsheimer:

Offensive realism:

You can never be sure of intentions of other states.

Why? You don't even know who will be in charge in five years.

Best to assume that all relationships are just temporary alliances driven by mutual self-interest.
As such, the best way for a country to survive is to be the most powerful player and limit the power acquisition of other countries.

Defensive realists hold the opposite of these beliefs.

U.S. didn't do enough to stop the rise of China in Mearsheimer's estimation.
Both offensive & defensive realists agreed that Liberal Hegemony was a big mistake (wars in Middle East)

Liberal Hegemony was based on the mistake that liberalism was universally shared, and that it was a more powerful & cohering force than nationalism.

Where offensive & defensive realists disagreed is on what to do about China.

Defensive said "wait and see". Offensive said "not so fast"

Both Obama & Trump campaigned against "Forever Wars" in Middle East, but deep state too strong for them to back out.
Henry Kissinger is a strange realist:

- Favored Vietnam War
- Favored Iraq War
- Opposed 2015 Iran nuclear agreement

People say Obama was too isolationist or soft but he was hawkish (e.g. Libya, Sirya
Problems w/ Liberal Hegemony:

- Creating liberal democracy is hard.
- Not everyone wants to be a liberal democracy
- Undermines nationalism, the strongest ideology on the planet
- Social engineering creates enemies.

Liberal Hegemony tried to create democratic gov'ts even in countries that hated us.

In contrast, offensive realism served U.S. interests first and foremost.

We regularly overthrew even democratic governments (e.g. Guatemala, Chile) if they weren't acting against U.S. interests
US missed it's chance for a unipolar world, & now will likely face a multi-polar world

We'll potentially worry about US-China relations, Russia relations, a potential cold war over the Persian Gulf (China imports 25% of oil from there)

"It's worse than a crime, it's a blunder"
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh.

Keep Current with Erik Torenberg

Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!