A Grand Strategy of Sustainment

"Sustainment" is one of the uglier neologisms I've heard in quite some time, but Shawn Brimley's short article advocating "A Grand Strategy of Sustainment" is one of the better quick takes on forward-looking strategy that I've read in some time. Highly recommended.

Note that beyond an end to the exclusion of voices who were right about Iraq in 2002-2003, what we really need is more diversity of ideas about American foreign policy and more strategic thinking that, like what Brimley's written here, reflects a real alternative to the years of hubris.

Comments

Another "Grand Strategy". Awesome. Let's make room on the shelf next to all the other grand strategies.

Posted by Dan Kervick | March 24, 2008 9:22 AM

Wasn't it a diversity of ideas that gave birth to the neo-cons? How about a diversity of good ideas about American foreign policy.

Posted by Jayhawk Max | March 24, 2008 10:22 AM

It figures MattY would think this was worth recommending; I expect Heads in the Sand to be on the same facile level. Where I stopped reading?

"Arrogant talk of helping rising powers become “responsible stakeholders” should be replaced with words of respect derived in part from America’s enduring position of strength."

Christ. Inaccurate and horribly written...

Posted by A New Fox News Fan | March 24, 2008 11:51 AM

We have a thread winner! I wrote a 600 word post about Brimley's essay, and Dan Kervick said it all in 16 words.

If you want the long version: "4GW: A solution of the second kind":
http://fabiusmaximus.wordpress.com/2008/03/22/grand-sustainment/

Posted by Fabius Maximus | March 24, 2008 8:18 PM

"The purpose of American grand strategy in the early 21st century should be to maintain our position of leadership in the world by rebuilding our legitimacy, renewing our key alliances, and ensuring our access to the global commons, in order to help sustain an international order based on a vibrant world economy."

Total crap.

Re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

This sort of nonsense has nothing to do with the reality of the military-industrial complex, the oil companies, political corruption, the dis-functionality of the entire political electorate, etc., ad nauseum.

The United States is a failing Empire. It's downfall will not be pretty. Millions will probably die - and likely most of them won't even be Americans.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | March 24, 2008 11:40 PM

The word is 'sustentation'.

Posted by B | March 24, 2008 11:43 PM

R S Hack is a hack, and his comments do not merit serious thought. As for Brimley, his "grand strategy" is just a repetition of the same old checklist. And ironically, most of what he says are things we are already doing, which he does nto seem to be aware of. All the talk about restoring legitimacy sounds really good, and it brings out the best in liberal self-loathing, but how do you do that? Do you honestly believe that if we had signed Kyoto things would be so much better right now? Essentially you're talking about symbolism. Our "grand strategy" should make other people feel good about themselves, so they won't want to attack us. We can start a campaign of "sustainment," improve the world, and everyone will be happy. Ok...how? We gave more money to Africa than ever before over the past 8 years, and I don't see Europeans and Middle Easterners lining up to laud us for it. I think what Mr. Brimley is missing is that a lot of the "reasons" given by those who disapprove of American leadership are essentially rationalizations for something they already think and feel anyway. If we had signed Kyoto, then people would just glaze over it and find something else that they disapprove of. And it is just getting old hearing people talk about the Bush administration as if they are responsible for all of world disagreements and hatred. When did people not hate each other? When over the past 1000 years did the Chinese, the Muslims, the Europeans, all see eye-to-eye and mutually respect one another? It is a depressing fact, and hopefully one day it will be less true, but that day will probably be in a century or more, not after President Obama goes before the UN and talks about how wonderful everyone is.

Posted by Derrick Smalls | March 28, 2008 3:23 PM