Chapter 10: National Security and Defense Policy

Study

Chapter Summary

One of the most significant and controversial U.S. foreign-policy domains is that of national security and defense policy. No other domain attracts more media attention, budgetary resources, and time commitments by political actors than the development and implementation of policies on national security and defense. At the same time, no other policy domain is as controversial to the public, both at home and abroad. Although the United States is commonly referred to as a peaceful country, it averages 1.5 military actions per year. Currently, the United States spends more on national defense than all other countries in the world combined. The grand strategies and tactics of U.S. national security policies also have implications for the lives of U.S. soldiers, the U.S. public, and the international community. Thus, it is not hard to understand the importance attached to this complicated policy domain.

The concept of national security policy refers to how, when, and where the United States engages in the defense of territory, population, and natural resources. Grand strategy, which generally changes to some degree with each president, focuses on long-term statements and planning regarding the role the United States plays in global politics, its national interests, and the means or tactics for achieving those interests. Geopolitical assets, strategic culture, state-society relations, and structural factors all affect U.S. grand strategy. Historic examples include Kennedy's push for a "flexible response," whereas Eisenhower stressed a massive buildup of traditional arms for a "new look." Modern examples include George W. Bush's doctrine of primacy and preemption and Clinton's global engagement strategy.

Actors making U.S. security policy have a variety of planning options. Military intervention is often not the first choice; instead policy actors try coercive diplomacy, or threats against offensive actors in an attempt to influence behavior. With the exception of the Cuban missile crisis, coercive diplomacy often fails due to the domestic and international constraints facing U.S. policy makers. More often, the United States must choose whether to intervene preemptively or preventively. The decision to invade Iraq in 2003 proved to be complex, as the Bush administration argued it was a preemptive strike while critics argued that U.S. intelligence failures and the lack of military and offensive capabilities by Iraq made the invasion a preventive war.

The difficulties of making U.S. security policy have shifted from a focus on nuclear issues, such as mutual assured destruction and the development of nuclear capabilities by additional countries, to a focus on a more destructive form of suicide terrorism. Terrorism presents new challenges to U.S. primacy in security policy based on the difficulties of asymmetric warfare and policing the homeland. The chapter discusses the tumultuous history of the United States' efforts to combat asymmetric warfare at home and abroad.