U.S. Grand Strategy in Syria Social Sciences Essay

U.S. Grand Strategy in Syria
Student Name
Course
Instructor
Date
A grand strategy is a set of ideas essential to deploying a country’s resources so as to archive its goals over the long run. According to Williamson Murray, A grand strategy involves some readiness and capacity to consider the future as far as the objectives of a political entity. Additionally, a grand strategy provides a conceptual road map and a combination of policy prescriptions. This allows state leaders to set a course for their nations away from the contemporary challenges to a desired future outcome and regulates leaders to have long term visions. Ultimately, the grand strategic vision of a state is based on its leadership, culture, history, geography ideology, socio-economic conditions, global standing and alliances. All states must make decisions and given America’s global influence and position of power, their decisions should be circumspect and logical. The first challenge is integrating core national interests into a set of narrow, prioritized and achievable objectives, reached by carefully utilizing increasingly-inhibited resources. The ends-means balance is the critical result from the national strategy planning process, but it wholly depends on a precise vision. Even the people who can come up with a risk plan may get carried away whenever they experience an unexpected crisis. However, a grand strategy addresses everyday challenges by providing a framework in which all situations can be responded to as required.[Murray, Williamson. "Thoughts On Grand Strategy". Assets.Cambridge.Org, 2020, https://assets.cambridge.org/97805217/61260/excerpt/9780521761260_excerpt.pdf. Accessed 25 Nov 2020.] [Stevens, Meakem, Tooze, Hirsh, and Fuchs. 2020. "America Doesn’T Need A Grand Strategy". Foreign Policy. https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/07/28/america-doesnt-need-a-grand-strategy-big-think-trump/. N.P] [Stevens, Meakem, Tooze, Hirsh, and Fuchs. 2020. N.P]
The current grand strategy applied by the United States involves having a broad international military presence, tremendous alliances and security responsibilities. Critics argue that abiding by this grand strategy has overstretched US and is proving disastrous to the nation. Bary Posen further claims that this Liberal Hegemony is not only costly but also wasteful and counterproductive. This is because the strategy necessitates an unnecessarily large overseas military commanded by a selfish industrial complex. An advanced military makes it easy for leaders to resort to violence when other peaceful ways of settling disputes might be available. In order to adapt to a changing world, Posen and other experts have recommended a less aggressive grand strategy that revolves around restraint. A grand strategy of restraint bridges the gap between isolationism and Hegemony by backing away from strategic commitments, maintaining a certain engagement level, and pursuing interests which are important to U.S. security. Restraint questions whether the US can keep to covering the costs of long-pursued, activist foreign policy, and its tendency to engage in military activities abroad. However, this strategy would have been appealing were it not flawed. Restraint irreparably weakens the...