No. Some countries (Saudi Arabia) are hedging more. Others (France) are unsuccessfully trying to lead some new geopolitical pole. Many (India, Japan, Sweden, Finland, Australia, UK, etc.) are closer to the US now than even a few years ago. nytimes.com/2023/04/19/opi… The chief complaint in much of the Middle East is not that America is too present but wishes to withdraw. In Asia it’s that countries want greater U.S. economic engagement. Europe navigating the Ukraine war without US support is unthinkable.

Strange as it sounds, China’s balloon could be America’s awakening: 🧵 China is the stated top priority of US foreign policy. The military’s pacing threat. Increasingly the focus of Congress. But the American people have had other priorities.

Before reacting to the National Security Strategy’s substance, a few reflections on what these documents are – and are not: “That’s not a strategy!” cries the purist, and true enough: the NSS never is. They don’t articulate objectives, list steps necessary to attain those goals, and specify the resources required to take those steps. (1)

It’s been six months since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and the world has changed. Now: Russia looked set to win quickly, augmenting its power. Instead Moscow is losing slowly and diminishing its power. (1)

A few thoughts on the President's Asia trip. It was worthwhile and comes at an important time. But there was too much Taiwan and too little trade. (1) The president’s Taiwan comments mark the third time he has publicly committed to defend Taiwan if attacked. Each time, the White House quickly insists that there is no change in the policy of strategic ambiguity. (2)

The recent consensus held that China, not Russia, represents America’s greatest national security challenge and that Asia, not Europe, is where this century’s fortunes will be determined.

With Putin’s war, now what? A 🧵 The U.S. should continue a long-term shift to Asia - the much-discussed “pivot" - but in a way that better balances resources and engagements across Asia, Europe and the ME. Paradoxically, Putin’s aggression demonstrates how this should be done. (1)

For 15 years, Vladimir Putin has sought to remake the international order, restore Russia’s place in it, divide his adversaries, and return his country to greatness. The conquest of Ukraine would aid that quest. And yet: Putin sought to divide NATO, reverse its expansion, and limit its eastern deployments. Instead, NATO is more unified than any time in decades, countries like Sweden, Finland and Kosovo are talking accession, and NATO troops are increasing in the east. (1)

Since the invasion began, the scale and rapidity of geopolitical shifts have been astonishing. Already: Russia has moved from a sullen, revisionist state to a clear and present danger to its neighbors, and has directly threatened countries beyond Ukraine. Governments have no trust in or tolerance for the Putin regime. (1)

Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine will have many consequences - for Ukrainians foremost, but elsewhere as well. A few thoughts on the implications: One casualty may be Washington’s foreign policy plans. The administration wishes to focus on China as the key long-term challenge and Asia as the key region. By ending ME wars, stabilizing ties w/ Russia & strengthening alliances, Washington would be free to compete with Beijing.