Access to oil is so vital that powerful countries can take extraordinary measures to protect themselves from ever being vulnerable to oil coercion. Rosemary A. Kelanic, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Notre Dame University, discusses the recent history of great powers’ quest for oil security and what kind of future military postures the United States and China may take toward the Persian Gulf. Rosemary A. Kelanic bioRosemary A. Kelanic, Black Gold and Blackmail: Oil and Great Power Politics, (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2020).Rosemary A. Kelanic, “Why Iran’s ‘Oil Weapon’ Isn’t That Scary,” The Washington Post, June 18, 2019. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Power Problems

Oil & Great Power Politics

President Joe Biden claimed he would defend human rights around the world, but his track record paints a different picture, especially in the Middle East. Quincy Institute senior fellow Annelle Sheline discusses how U.S. policies in the region have protected oppressive leaders while undermining American interests.Show NotesAnnelle Sheline bioAnnelle Sheline, “House Passes Measure Ending U.S. Support for Saudi War in Yemen,” Responsible Statecraft, September 23, 2021.Annelle Sheline and Steven Simon, “Reset Overdue: Remaking U.S.-Saudi Relations,” Quincy Brief no. 6, October 2020. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Bad Friends: America’s Middle East Allies

Stephen Wertheim is a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for Peace. He discusses 20 years of failed post-9/11 national security policies, the strategy of global military dominance, and the ongoing the battle of ideas on the U.S. role in the world.Show Notes:Stephen Wertheim bioStephen Wertheim, “The Ever-Ready Answer for Failure in Afghanistan: More War,” The Washington Post, Stephen Wertheim, “Delusions of Dominance: Biden Can’t Restore American Primacy – And Shouldn’t Try,” Foreign Affairs, January 25, 2021. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

The Battle of Ideas over America's Role in the World

U.S. Naval War College professor Peter Dombrowski argues that the most pressing problems Americans face are internal domestic challenges and non-military risks like pandemics and climate change. But national security policy devotes disproportionate time and resources to confronting inflated threats from external actors. He joins the show to discuss the problems with an overly militarized grand strategy that has failed to properly identify or prioritize threats. Show Notes Peter Dombrowski bioSimon Reich and Peter Dombrowski, The End of Grand Strategy: U.S. Maritime Operations in the Twenty-First Century (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2018).Peter Dombrowski and Simon Reich, “Does Donald Trump Have a Grand Strategy?” International Affairs 93, no. 5, (September 2017): pp. 1013-1037. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

A Distracted Grand Strategy

The chaos that accompanied the U.S. military withdrawal from Afghanistan does not negate the wisdom of bringing the war to an end, despite protestations in Washington about U.S. credibility and the "sustainability" of endless war. Benjamin H. Friedman, policy director at Defense Priorities, weighs in.  Show Notes Benjamin H. Friedman bioBenjamin H. Friedman, “Exiting Afghanistan: Ending America’s Longest War,” Defense Priorities, August 2019. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Cutting Through the Noise on Afghanistan Withdrawal

The now-popular "ending endless wars" slogan has generated more political rhetoric than real policy changes. David Sterman, senior policy analyst at New America, helps define the concept of "endless war" as a strategy based on unachievable objectives and offers practical policy solutions for a substantive shift away from the War on Terror. Show NotesDavid Sterman bioDavid Sterman, “Defining Endless Wars: The First Step Towards Ending Them,” New America, January 26, 2021.Peter Bergen, David Sterman, and Melissa Salyk-Virk, “America’s Counterterrorism Wars: Tracking the United States’s Drone Strikes and Other Operations in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and Libya,” New America, June 17, 2021. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

How to Actually End Endless Wars

Boston University’s Joshua Shifrinson weighs in on a new critique of the restraint school in U.S. foreign policy debates and explains why the strategy proposed by some liberal internationalists to confront a rising China - a strategy he terms "neo-primacy" - is bound to fail. Show NotesJoshua Shifrinson bioJoshua R. Itzkowitz Shifrinson, “Neo-Primacy and the Pitfalls of US Strategy Toward China” The Washington Quarterly 41, no. 4 (Winter 2019): pp. 65-83.Bruce W. Jettleson, “Be Wary of China Threat Inflation,” Foreign Policy, July 30, 2021. Daniel Deudney and G. John Ikenberry, “Misplaced Restraint: The Quincy Coalition Versus Liberal Internationalism,” Survival 63, no. 4 (2021): pp. 7-32. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

The "Restraint Coalition" and Strategy toward China

9/11 set the course for U.S. national security policy in the 21st century, often with counterproductive results. Cato Institute senior fellow Justin Logan explains how post-9/11 foreign policy went off the rails and thrust America into disastrous elective wars and wasteful spending sprees. The lack of accountability for those who carried out such failures bodes ill for the future. Justin Logan bioJustin Logan, “The Case for Withdrawing from the Middle East,” Defense Priorities, September 2020. Justin Logan, “Why Wait Five to 10 Years to Leave?” Responsible Statecraft, June 24, 2021.Jane K. Cramer and A. Trevor Thrall, Why Did the United States Invade Iraq? (London: Routledge, 2012). See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Foreign Policy Malpractice Since 9/11

 As the U.S. military withdraws from Afghanistan, the Biden administration is retaining some presence nearby. Tactics are shifting, but U.S. intervention looks far from over. Cato research fellow Sahar Khan discusses the debate over building bases in Pakistan and the role of U.S. security contractors in the so-called Forever War. Show Notes Sahar Khan bioSahar Khan, “Double Game: Why Pakistan Supports Militants and Resists U.S. Pressure to Stop,” Cato Institute Policy Analysis no. 849, September 20, 2018.Imran Khan, “Imran Khan: Pakistan is Ready to be a Partner for Peace in Afghanistan, but We Will Not Host U.S. Bases,” Washington Post, June 21, 2021. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Afghanistan: An End to the War or a Shift in Tactics?

Many realists assume that national leaders are rational. But are they? University of Southern California professor Brian Rathbun draws on classical realism to argue that realpolitik is a demanding psychological standard that is less prevalent than often assumed. Constructive diplomacy obligates policymakers, therefore, to better account for both their own subjective biases and those of other states.Show NotesBrian Rathbun bioBrian Rathbun, Reasoning of State: Realists, Romantics and Rationality in International Relations (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2019).Brian C. Rathbun, Diplomacy’s Value: Creating Security in 1920s Europe and the Contemporary Middle East (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2014).Brian Rathbun, “The Reality of Realpolitik: What Bismarck Rationality Reveals about International Politics,” International Security 43, no. 1 (Summer 2018): 7-55. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Realpolitik and Diplomacy: Are States Rational?

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has erupted again, but the politics in both Israel and the United States on this longstanding issue appear to be undergoing change. Jeremy Pressman, a political scientist at the University of Connecticut and an expert on the conflict, explains the historical context of the recent outbreak in violence, argues the cycle of military force undermines the objectives of both sides, and discusses the current tensions in the U.S.-Israeli relationship. Show NotesJeremy Pressman bioJeremy Pressman,The Sword is Not Enough: Arabs, Israelis, and the Limits of Military Force(Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, 2020).Jeremy Pressman, “Visions in Collision: What Happened at Camp David and Taba?”Quarterly Journal: International Security28. no. 2, (Fall 2003): 5-43. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

The Limits of Force in Israel-Palestine

One longstanding predicate of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East -- that America's military presence in the Persian Gulf region protects the free flow of oil -- is false. That is according to University of Pennsylvania professor Robert Vitalis, along with a growing academic literature scrutinizing the claim. Because of the global nature of the oil market, even infamous past disruptions, such as the so-called Arab oil embargo of 1973, have not had as significant an effect as commonly believed. This erroneous basis for U.S. strategy, Vitalis explains, also justifies a misguided emphasis on Washington's close relationship with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, among other costly consequences. Robert Vitalis bioRobert Vitalis, Oilcraft: The Myths of Scarcity and Security That Haunt U.S. Energy Policy, (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2020). See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

America's Oil Myths

The renewed debate in Washington over U.S. foreign policy reflects changing attitudes in public opinion. George Mason University professor and Cato Senior Fellow A. Trevor Thrall discusses how generational differences are changing views on U.S. military activism and America's global role. Millennials and younger people generally support international engagement while rejecting excessive military intervention.  Show NotesA. Trevor Thrall bioA. Trevor Thrall and Erik Goepner, (2021), “The New Faces of Internationalism: How Generational Change Is Reshaping American Foreign Policy Attitudes,” Cato Working Paper, Cato Institute, Washington, DC. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Public Opinion & U.S. Foreign Policy

Jessica Trisko Darden joins John Glaser to discuss how U.S. foreign aid tends to support state violence and coercion. Economic and military aid often helps undemocratic regimes secure and sustain their power and carry out human rights abuses. Even aid conditioned on good behavior and respect for democratic norms is highly fungible and often misused in ways that contradict the stated intentions of U.S. policymakers. Dr. Darden discusses the three case studies she details in her book to draw those conclusions.Jessica Trisko Darden bioJessica Trisko Darden,Aiding and Abetting: U.S. Foreign Assistance and State Violence, (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2020). See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Abetting State Violence

What are China's international ambitions and how does Beijing seek to achieve them? Johns Hopkins professor Daniel S. Markey joins the show to discuss how the People’s Republic of China has pursued evolving strategies in discrete regions and to explore what strategic options are open to the United States in response.Daniel S. Markey bioDaniel S. Markey, China's Western Horizon: Beijing and the New Geopolitics of Eurasia, (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2020). See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

China's Evolving Strategy

Power Problems is a bi-weekly podcast from the Cato Institute. Hosts Trevor Thrall and Emma Ashford offer a skeptical take on U.S. foreign policy, and discuss today’s big questions in international security with guests from across the political spectrum. Podcast Hashtag: #FPPowerProblems.

hubhopper

Power Problems

hubhopper