Introduction to Grand Strategies

What is/are Grand Strategies?

Grand Strategies - ” Although this might seem like a bewildering array of plausible alternatives, there are better and worse ways to go about choosing grand strategies of decline. ^[1] Peace internationalism, black internationalism, isolationist-internationalism, and of course Wilsonian internationalism amounted to grand strategies aiming to remake the organization of the world and the place of the United States in global relations, and seeking to transform international relations in response to what most of those living at the time considered the most cataclysmic event in human history: the Great War. ^[2] Even in regard to post-1945 US foreign policy, a period that has been sub-divided by many distinguished scholars, it is difficult to identify clearly demarcated grand strategies that provide overarching clarity. ^[3] Economic statecraft provides great powers with a set of valuable tools they can employ in pursuing grand strategies, but the importance of its contribution is often overlooked. ^[4] Not only do analysts lack a consistent way of describing how risers’ grand strategies vary, but insight into the drivers of rising state strategy remains inchoate. ^[5] The chapter then addresses a second question: How much does grand strategy matter in the context of American history? History suggests that grand strategies do not alter the trajectory of great-power politics all that much. ^[6] This paper develops a framework for examining the grand strategies of great powers through the use of the role contestation literature. ^[7] Indeed, a diverse array of US presidents, lawmakers, and activists have had grand strategies in mind as they pursued major immigration reform. ^[8] ” It also demonstrates how frameworks derived from field theories, actor-network theory, and narrative theories illuminate grand strategies and the processes that produce them. ^[9] Specifically, drawing on data from interviews about universities’ engagement with the two Chinese grand strategies, the paper discusses university leaders and academics’ experience and perception of Hong Kong’s global status against a policy context that foregrounds a deeper integration with the Chinese national development. ^[10] This chapter examines the effects of population aging on states’ grand strategies. ^[11] Third, this chapter identifies possible intended and unintended technological trends resulting from the adoption of specific grand strategies, and how, in the medium-to-long term, they can strengthen a country in its strategic competition with adversaries. ^[12] The chapter then illustrates how this framework advances the debate about grand-strategic change by setting up a distinction between grand-strategic overhauls (changes to grand strategy’s first level—or changes between grand strategies) and grand-strategic adjustments (changes to grand strategy’s second level—or changes within grand strategies). ^[13] What do culture and identity have to do with grand strategy—the task of matching broad national security aims to capabilities? Is grand strategy not the preserve of politics and power, and the timeless wisdom of realpolitik? This chapter argues that culture and identity are essential components of any realistic account of grand strategy, since grand strategies tell a story of who or what a country is, and should be, in world politics. ^[14] The chapter illustrates this idea by sketching intelligence postures for three grand strategies: restraint, liberal internationalism, and primacy. ^[15] Using the United States as a benchmark, three dimensions are considered in which grand strategy can be compared: first, attributes of the major types commonly discussed in the literature; second, similarities and differences in the implementation of grand strategies over time, using US strategic relations with contemporary Russia as an example; and finally, across space, properties of the grand strategies that are interactively employed by other major powers in relation to the United States in the Indo-Pacific. ^[16] Grand strategies can be anticipatory and long term, seeking to shape the development of instruments of state power, adding new agencies and entirely new competencies or forms of power to a nation’s arsenal. ^[17] Another is the idea that only certain types of grand strategies are worthy of the label. ^[18] Rising power perceptions of the hegemon’s power and threat shape the selection of rising power grand strategies. ^[19] We conclude by showing that this shift in international power, coupled by the grand strategies preferred by China and the US, are imperilling the fragile scaffolding of global governance. ^[20] Grand strategies are among the analytical concepts for classification and analysis of U. ^[21] Following the rules of geopolitics grand strategies have been designed. ^[22] It traces how much the evolution of BRICS’ rational was prompted by changes of the international system and Russia’s and China’s grand strategies. ^[23] Incompatible strategic cultures bring about clashing grand strategies and generate conflictual relations. ^[24] The findings have important implications on great powers’ grand strategies, strategic behaviors of oil states, and the role of oil in international security. ^[25]