Thread by @ProfPaulPoast

What's so GRAND about "Grand Strategy"?

(and while we're at it, why do we always use chess pieces to visual it?)

[THREAD]

Grand strategy is again a hot topic because @beverlygage resigned this week as director Yale's grand strategy program.

https://twitter.com/beverlygage/status/1443570916768813058

Gage's resignation has generated a host of responses that are critical of the particular program at Yale...

https://twitter.com/WonkVJ/status/1443641261009690624

...and about the idea of Grand Strategy itself.

https://twitter.com/EmmaMAshford/status/1443951682203889668

Indeed, the usefulness of Grand Strategy has been a point of debate quite recently.

For example, compare @dhnexon, @dandrezner, & Randy Schweller in @ForeignAffairs with...

foreignaffairs.com/articles/world…

.....@maevecsryan & Andrew Ehrhardt in @WarOnTheRocks.
warontherocks.com/2020/05/grand-…

So what is Grand Strategy?

A useful starting point is the historian John Lewis Gaddis, one of the founders of the Yale program.

He defined Grand Strategy as “the alignment of unlimited aspirations with necessarily limited capabilities.”
amazon.com/Grand-Strategy…

Gaddis definition echoes the standard economic definition of "scarcity": unlimited wants faced by limited means.

Or more precisely, the word "alignment" in Gaddis definition suggests the states figure out what they can do GIVEN what they have.

But that opens a big question: why do states need to "figure out" what they "can do"? Can't they just simply exist and leave others alone?

That is why I like @RebeccaLissner's 2018 @TXNatSecReview piece.

In it, she clearly lays out the various ways one can and has used the term "grand strategy".
tnsr.org/2018/11/what-i…

I view grand strategy as "a state's role in the world".

This is close to what @RebeccaLissner calls "grand strategy as blueprint".

Consider some examples.

Your state could view itself as having a Wilsonian role: "to make the world safe for democracy"...

...though Wilson also had visions of keeping the world safe for other things too, like White Supremacy

https://twitter.com/ProfPaulPoast/status/1274678791030407169

Your state could view itself as having an Evangelistic role: To spread your view of economic policies (see Open Door and Washington Consensus)...
amazon.com/Political-Econ…

...or even your view of God.
amazon.com/Sword-Spirit-S…

The state could have a Sinatra role: I do it my way and not the way others -- read major powers -- want it done (i.e. strategic autonomy)
carnegieeurope.eu/2021/03/08/eu-…

The state could have a Scrooge role: "I wish to be left alone"

So "Grand Strategy" is that simple: what role do you want to play in the world & what resources do you need to achieve it...

...or what role do you want to play GIVEN your resources (@CarlaNorrlof & Bill Wolhforth point out that states fail at this)
journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.117…

That definition of Grand strategy also suggests something else: chess pieces are NOT a useful metaphor (despite it being a popular visual when discussing the topic 👇)
nationalinterest.org/feature/the-ma…

Why? Because while the means in chess are limited (you only have so many pieces and they are restricted in what they can do), the pieces and the goal (win via checkmate) of chess are the same for EVERYONE.

That's not the case with Grand Strategy: states can differ in both how they define their place in the world AND the tools they use to achieve that place.

In other words, one state might play chess, while another plays Super Mario Kart

So while "grand strategy" might be grand in scope, the idea is simple: what's your states role in the world?

(and let's stop using chess to depict it)

[END]

Addendum 1: @dhnexon offers further reading on the subject (and as he says, there really is an iceberg of reading).

The @NinaSilove article is particularly useful to pair (& compare) w/ the @RebeccaLissner article published the same year.

https://twitter.com/dhnexon/status/1444325000316653572

Addendum 2: For more on the "roles" states can play in the world, worth going back to this classic @ISQ_Jrnl piece by Holsti (h/t @DrSolhdoost)

academic.oup.com/isq/article-ab…

In particular, Holsti's table of types (useful to compare to my short list -- "isolate" is what I'm calling "Scrooge)