2013
DOI: 10.1162/isec_a_00107
| View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: After sixty-five years of pursuing a grand strategy of global leadership—nearly a third of which transpired without a peer great power rival—has the time come for the United States to switch to a strategy of retrenchment? According to most security studies scholars who write on the future of U.S. grand strategy, the answer is an unambiguous yes: they argue that the United States should curtail or eliminate its overseas military presence, abolish or dramatically reduce its global security commitments, and minim… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
43
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 130 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 56 publications
0
43
0
Order By: Relevance
“…9 What we are calling 'high engagement' is sometimes referred to as deep engagement or forward engagement. See, for example, Brooks et al (2013), Brooks et al (2012Brooks et al ( /2013. 10 Low engagement can also be understood as selective engagement or offshore balancing.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…9 What we are calling 'high engagement' is sometimes referred to as deep engagement or forward engagement. See, for example, Brooks et al (2013), Brooks et al (2012Brooks et al ( /2013. 10 Low engagement can also be understood as selective engagement or offshore balancing.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In fact, the United States engages in soft balancing against other states. As an example, 'In 2011 Washington coordinated action with a number of Southeast Asian states to oppose Beijing's claims in the South China Sea by highlighting established international law and norms to deny China's claim legitimacy' (Brooks et al, 2012(Brooks et al, /2013. Similarly, according to Blarel and Ebert (2015), in South Asia, the United States had significant interest in de-escalating the nuclear competition between India and Pakistan, using a pivotal deterrence strategy to influence the strategic choices of the regional states.…”
Section: How Engaged Is the Global Hegemon?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…6 In Europe and East Asia, these commitments took shape formally and quite early in the post-war period, with the creation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and a system of interlocking alliances in the Asia-Pacific. In the Persian Gulf, U.S. presence and guarantees developed more gradually, and with a lower public profile.…”
Section: Patterns Of Post-war Grand Strategymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Unclear or dysfunctional division of responsibilities within military organizations, state bureaucracies and organizations is another scholarly concern (Bovcon, 2011;Rapport, 2012;Farrell and Giustozzi, 2013;Karlsrud, 2013;Kathman, 2013;Meyer, 2013). While many scholars focus on the challenges inherent in the sharing of responsibilities, opportunities are considered as well when it comes to sharing among allies and partners (Tierney, 2011;Brooks et al, 2012). Particular attention is directed toward the sharing of responsibilities within NATO (Yost, 2009(Yost, , 2011Hallams and Schreer, 2012).…”
Section: 'Sharing Responsibility'mentioning
confidence: 99%