By Mira Rapp-Hooper
Defining ends and means is hard; aligning them is even more so. Still the benefits of a strategy outweigh the costs.
In mid-December the House Armed Services Committee’s Seapower Subcommittee, chaired by Randy Forbes (R-VA), held hearings to discuss China’s growing naval power. When questioned about the United States’ strategy for engaging China at sea, consensus appeared to emerge: Washington did not have one. The four witnesses agreed that there was a need to find a coherent approach to China’s naval emergence. More broadly, the United States needed to craft a whole-of-government approach for the Asia-Pacific, or risk policy incoherence. This consensus appeared to echo what many experts in Washington have been saying for months—that the so-called pivot or rebalance has thus far not been much more than a tagline, albeit a well-intentioned one.
Shortly after the hearings, Diplomat contributor Harry Kazianis argued that the United States does have a strategy: it is hedging, working with China economically, while making defensive preparations regional allies. While this may be a very accurate description of how the United States is engaging the region at present, I would argue that this is not actually a strategy. A hedge is something that provides protection or defense. Hedging can also mean to limit or qualify something by conditions or exceptions. But what, precisely, is the United States protecting? How does conditional engagement further that objective?
A strategy is a plan for achieving a goal over a period of time. Scholars and other pundits may exaggerate the degree to which such plans are realistic. Helmuth von Moltke is often quoted for his rejoinder: “No plan survives contact with the enemy.” More recently, Lawrence Freedman wrote on the matter, and demonstrated that strategies rarely produce the quick victories they envision. Freedman argues, however, that they are nonetheless valuable as blueprints for achieving finite goals. Put simply, a strategy connects political aims with the means that will be used to reach them. Having one, therefore requires that both of these things are reasonably well-defined.
Read the full story at The Diplomat