Text Browser Navigation Bar: Main Site Navigation and Search | Current Page Navigation | Current Page Content

U.S. Army War College >> Strategic Studies Institute >> Publications >> American Grand Strategy After 9/11: An Assessment

Login to "My SSI" Contact About SSI Cart: 0 items

Strategic Studies Institute

United States Army War College

The Source for National Security

Research & Analysis

U.S. Army War College >> Strategic Studies Institute >> Publications >> Details

American Grand Strategy After 9/11: An Assessment

Authored by Dr. Stephen D. Biddle.

American Grand Strategy After ... Cover Image

Other Studies by Keyword

+[Grand Strategy] +[Biddle] +[war aims] +[war termination] +[risk weapons of mass destruction] +[terrorism] +[insurgency] +[Iraq] +[great power competition] +[balance of power] +[balancing] +[internal balancing] +[external balancing] +[international relations] +[unipolarity] +[multilateralism] +[threats] +[rollback] +[containment] +[end states] +[national security strategy] +[preemption]

Brief Synopsis

In the three years since 9-11, the Administration has yet to arrive at a clear definition of the enemy or the aim in the War on Terrorism; to date, American policy has combined ambitious public statements with ambiguity on critical particulars. Heretofore, the costs of pursuing such ambitious but ill-defined goals have been high but tolerable. The ongoing insurgency in Iraq, however, is increasing the costs of grand strategic ambiguity to the point where fundamental choices can no longer be deferred. There are two broad alternatives for resolving these ambiguities and creating a coherent and logically sufficient grand strategy: rollback and containment. Rollback would retain the ambitious goals implicit in today's declaratory policy and accept the cost and near-term risk inherent in pursuing them. Containment would settle for more modest goals in exchange for lower costs and lower near-term risks. Neither alternative dominates the other on analytical grounds – both involve serious costs as well as benefits. Most important, the choice between them turns on a series of basic value judgments on the acceptability of risk, the relationship between near-term and long-term risk, and the ultimate degree of security the Nation should seek.

You may also be interested in the following titles:

Survey: American Grand Strategy After 9/11: An Assessment

1. How would you rate the writing and overall quality? (5 best - 1 Worst)

2. Is the content relevant for influencing present and future debates?

Also by the Author/Editor:

The 2006 Lebanon Campaign and the Future of Warfare: Implications for Army and Defense Policy
Afghanistan and the Future of Warfare: Implications for Army and Defense Policy

View other pubs in the following category:

Global Strategy

  • Download it Now!

    • Download Format: PDF
    • PDF File Size: 0.33MB
  • Hardcopies

    • Study is: Available via Download Only
    • View Cart
    • All hardcopies are free of charge, shipping inclusive.
    • For out of stock publications, refer to the new GPO on-demand site. For a small fee, recieve many prior publications. Click here to visit.
    • All materials on our website are available as a free download.

Subscribe using RSS Website Subscriptions