4.7 • 6.2K Ratings
🗓️ 7 June 2022
⏱️ 60 minutes
🧾️ Download transcript
What, if any, theory of international relations best explains U.S. foreign policy outcomes? Why, for example, did President Biden withdraw American forces from Afghanistan, re-engage Iran on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, impose harsher than expected sanctions on Russia, and give more than expected support to Ukraine following the Russian invasion? Jack Goldsmith sat down with Richard Hanania, the president of the Center for the Study of Partisanship and Ideology, whose new book, “Public Choice Theory and the Illusion of Grand Strategy,” seeks to provide answers to these types of questions. They discussed Hanania’s view that academic theories about American grand strategy cannot explain important U.S. foreign policy outcomes, and his argument that these outcomes are better explained by public choice theory, especially by the dominant influences on the presidency of government contractors, the national security bureaucracy, and foreign governments. They also discussed whether realistic complaints about these influences are consistent with realistic premises about how to discern the national interest and the value, if any, of international relations theorizing.
Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Click on a timestamp to play from that location
| 0:00.0 | The following podcast contains advertising. |
| 0:04.0 | To access an ad-free version of the LawFair podcast, |
| 0:08.0 | become a material supporter of LawFair at patreon.com slash law fair. |
| 0:14.0 | That's patreon.com slash law fair. |
| 0:18.0 | Also, check out LawFair's other podcast offerings, |
| 0:22.0 | rational security, chatter, law fair no bull, and the aftermath. |
| 0:29.0 | The following podcast contains advertising. |
| 0:33.0 | Right, so if you say it was to make America stronger, |
| 0:37.0 | the goal of America is to make America stronger, |
| 0:41.0 | or it's to uphold international norms, you look back and you say, |
| 0:45.0 | okay, Iraq clearly didn't do that. |
| 0:47.0 | Now that's a presumption that's rebuttable, |
| 0:49.0 | if you go back to the history, and you see, |
| 0:51.0 | oh, well, they had a careful plan, |
| 0:53.0 | and they would lead to actually the US, |
| 0:55.0 | having greater power or strength due to Iraq. |
| 0:57.0 | They had a plan to seize the oil or something, |
| 0:59.0 | or you know, or to do something else, but it just didn't work. |
| 1:01.0 | And then you look at the history, |
| 1:03.0 | and then it only hurts more the theory of grand strategy. |
| 1:07.0 | I mean, the lack of thought that was put into Iraq and Afghanistan |
| 1:11.0 | at the very beginning and the key decisions. |
... |
Please login to see the full transcript.
Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from The Lawfare Institute, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.
Generated transcripts are the property of The Lawfare Institute and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.
Copyright © Tapesearch 2025.