The US’ National Defense Strategy Is The Epitome Of Neo-Realism

The US’ National Defense Strategy focuses on Great Power competition.

The unclassified summary of the recently released document outlines three prevailing strategic approaches that the Pentagon aims to follow in the coming years, which are to reinforce and expand its alliance system while optimizing military lethality and back-end departmental operations such as logistics and expenditures. The clichéd saying of building a “lean, mean, killing machine” is very apt in this context, but while that’s technically the mission of all militaries, the American one is reconceptualizing its purpose in line with the Neo-Realist paradigm of International Relations and sees its core objective as maintaining a balance of power that can indefinitely sustain its post-Cold War global model.

The US-led world order that America created and ultimately led after 1991 is weakening, and the decentralization trend of multipolarity is chipping away at the centralization status quo of unipolarity. American decision makers believe that their Russian and Chinese rivals who are leading this process have mastered the liberal “rules of the game” and are now adept enough at using international institutions and multilateral trade arrangements to their advantage, thus necessitating the US to reprioritize the Neo-Realist paradigm of power and national interests in response. Washington has always been engaged in Machiavellian machinations of divide and rule, but this time it understands that its chances of success are slim if it’s forced to go head-to-head against the Russian-Chinese Strategic Partnership without any support.

The Libyan War-era policy of “Lead From Behind” has returned to relevancy in response because the US is compelled under these circumstances to rely more on its regional partners who have – or are led to believe that they have – a shared stake in the outcome of the New Cold War. Concurrent with this, however, the Trump Administration seeks to prioritize across-the-board burden-sharing, especially in the operational and financial realms, equalizing the US’ relationship with its allies and forcing them to fairly contribute in all ways if they expect to reap any “rewards” from future joint ventures. In exchange for deepening their full-spectrum military integration with the US, America’s partners can enjoy the economic fruits of the Washington Consensus, though provided that they’re able to successfully preserve it in the face of the Chinese-led Silk World Order and don’t come to believe that Beijing could offer them a better deal.

The transition from unipolarity to multipolarity is clearly being preceded by a period of global chaos made all the more acute by Trump’s “Kraken”-like propensity to shake up the state of international affairs with the intent of creating more strategic opportunities for the US at the expense of its system-challenging Russian and Chinese rivals. Seeing as how the Neo-Realist model is now driving America’s military strategy, it naturally follows that its attendant focus on geopolitics will also be observed by the US as well, thereby explaining why the phrase “Indo-Pacific” is repeated almost a dozen times in the 14-page summarized document. The US obviously wants to use India and a constellation of other allies in this transoceanic space to “contain China” following the same model that it’s been practicing for decades against Russia with NATO, and the end result will likely be that the Pentagon’s “lean, mean, killing machine” engages in more “Lead From Behind” Hybrid Wars against both of their regional interests in the coming years.

US’ National Defense Strategy
Defense Secretary James N. Mattis announces the new National Defense Strategy at the Hopkins University, Jan. 19, 2018

The post presented is the partial transcript of the CONTEXT COUNTDOWN radio program on Sputnik News, aired on Friday Jan 26, 2018:

 

DISCLAIMER: The author writes for this publication in a private capacity which is unrepresentative of anyone or any organization except for his own personal views. Nothing written by the author should ever be conflated with the editorial views or official positions of any other media outlet or institution. 

Reposts are welcomed with the reference to ORIENTAL REVIEW.
Print Friendly, PDF & Email
21 Comments
  1. Pingback: La stratégie de défense nationale des États-Unis est l’épitomé du néo-réalisme | OrientalReview.org – Site Title

  2. Pingback: The US’ National Defense Strategy’s Focus on Great Power Competition |  SHOAH

  3. Pingback: The US Deep State And The Democrats Are The Problem, Not The Solution | OrientalReview.org

  4. Pingback: The US Deep State and the Democrats Are the Problem, Not the Solution – Counter Information

  5. Pingback: Korybko: The US Deep State And The Democrats Are The Problem, Not The Solution - Novus Vero

  6. Pingback: Korybko: The US Deep State And The Democrats Are The Problem, Not The Solution – The Deplorable Patriots

  7. Pingback: Korybko: The US Deep State And The Democrats Are The Problem, Not The Solution – ProTradingResearch

  8. Pingback: Korybko: The US Deep State And The Democrats Are The Problem, Not The Solution | Real Patriot News

  9. Pingback: Korybko: The US Deep State And The Democrats Are The Problem, Not The Solution – Wall Street Karma

  10. Pingback: Korybko: The US Deep State And The Democrats Are The Problem, Not The Solution | StockTalk Journal

  11. Pingback: Korybko: The US Deep State And The Democrats Are The Problem, Not The Solution | Investing Daily News

  12. Pingback: Today’s News 5th February 2018 | The One Hundredth Monkey

  13. Pingback: Korybko: The US Deep State And The Democrats Are The Problem, Not The Solution – The Conservative Insider

  14. Pingback: Korybko: The US Deep State And The Democrats Are The Problem, Not The Solution – The Constitutional News Network

  15. Pingback: German Mideast Arms Exports: Full Freeze Or Geopolitical Game? - Novus Vero

  16. Pingback: German Mideast Arms Exports: Full Freeze Or Geopolitical Game? – The Deplorable Patriots

  17. Pingback: German Mideast Arms Exports: Full Freeze Or Geopolitical Game? - Telzilla

  18. Pingback: German Mideast Arms Exports: Full Freeze Or Geopolitical Game? – ProTradingResearch

  19. Pingback: German Mideast Arms Exports: Full Freeze Or Geopolitical Game? | Real Patriot News

  20. Pingback: German Mideast Arms Exports: Full Freeze Or Geopolitical Game? | StockTalk Journal

  21. Pingback: German Mideast Arms Exports: Full Freeze Or Geopolitical Game? | Economic Crisis Report

Leave a Reply