The New U.S. Strategic Debate

Ronald D. Asmus

ResearchPublished 1994

This report assesses the process and the multiple and growing pressures for a reexamination of U.S. global strategy and the U.S. role in the world. It argues that a new broad-ranging debate over future American strategy is both likely and desirable. It clearly behooves a smart defense planner to seek to better understand the pressures pushing for such a debate, the fault lines emerging, and the key drivers of elite and public opinion. Until the debate over future U.S. strategy is clarified, it will be difficult for military planners to proceed with clear guidance on future strategic and defense planning — or at least until the issue of the political sustainability of such guidance is established in clear elite and public support. This should not be read as a recipe for inaction, but rather as an appeal for strategists and military planners to try to pay closer attention to issues of of domestic political consensus, legitimation, and sustainability, and to how these factors are likely to affect future U.S. strategy.

Document Details

Citation

Chicago Manual of Style

Asmus, Ronald D., The New U.S. Strategic Debate. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 1994. https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR240-1.html.
BibTeX RIS

Research conducted by

This publication is part of the RAND monograph report series. The monograph report was a product of RAND from 1993 to 2003. RAND monograph reports presented major research findings that addressed the challenges facing the public and private sectors. They included executive summaries, technical documentation, and synthesis pieces.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.

Version Note

This publication supersedes a previous version published in 1993 (MR-240-A).