Mapping Foreign Policy Traditions and Their Modern Echoes

Following last week's spirited discussion comparing recent US postures toward Venezuela, Greenland, and elsewhere to Kaiser Wilhelm's machpolitik in the lead up to World War I (which definitely did not end well for Germany), we'll take a step back to examine the broader landscape of foreign policy approaches. What distinguishes pragmatic realpolitik from reckless machpolitik? How does idealpolitik differ from both? And where do other traditions—isolationism, liberal internationalism, neoconservatism—fit into this framework?
This week, we'll explore a working taxonomy of foreign policy strategies, grounding our discussion in historical examples from the 20th and early 21st centuries. Our goal is to develop a shared vocabulary for analyzing current events and to test whether recent US actions represent a rational pursuit of national interests or something more destabilizing.

## A Working Taxonomy of Foreign Policy Approaches

### I. Interest-Based Realism

Frameworks prioritizing national interest, security, and power, with varying degrees of restraint
A. Realpolitik (Pragmatic Realism)

• Core principle: Pursue national interests through pragmatic diplomacy, balancing power without ideological crusades
• Characteristics: Accepts limits, values stability, seeks negotiated settlements, maintains international order as a means to security
• Historical examples:
• Kissinger's détente with USSR and opening to China (1970s)
• George H.W. Bush's management of German reunification and Soviet collapse (1989-1991)
• Nixon's withdrawal from Vietnam coupled with great power diplomacy

B. Machpolitik (Power Politics Without Restraint)

• Core principle: Maximize power and prestige through aggressive assertion, risk-taking, and dominance
• Characteristics: Dismisses diplomatic constraints, pursues zero-sum competition, values demonstrative strength over calculated interest
• Historical examples:
• Kaiser Wilhelm II's "place in the sun" naval buildup and diplomatic brinkmanship (1890s-1914)
• Soviet invasion of Afghanistan (1979)
• Russia's annexation of Crimea and invasion of Ukraine (2014, 2022)

C. Defensive Realism (Restraint)

• Core principle: Security through limited engagement, avoiding overextension and unnecessary conflicts
• Characteristics: Skeptical of intervention, emphasizes cost-benefit analysis, prioritizes direct threats
• Historical examples:
• Eisenhower's refusal to intervene in Hungary (1956) and rejection of massive military buildups
• Obama's "Don't do stupid stuff" doctrine and reluctance to intervene in Syria beyond limited strikes

### II. Values-Based Idealpolitik

Frameworks emphasizing moral principles, international norms, and universal values
A. Liberal Internationalism

• Core principle: Promote democracy, human rights, and international institutions as foundations for peace
• Characteristics: Multilateralism, faith in international law and organizations, economic interdependence as peace-builder
• Historical examples:
• Wilson's League of Nations advocacy (post-WWI)
• FDR's creation of UN framework (1940s)
• Carter's human rights-centered foreign policy (1977-1981)
• Obama's emphasis on multilateral coalitions and international agreements (Iran Deal, Paris Climate Accord)

B. Neoconservatism (Assertive Idealism)

• Core principle: Use American power to spread democracy and liberal values, including through force
• Characteristics: Skeptical of international institutions, willing to act unilaterally, sees regime change as legitimate tool
• Historical examples:
• Reagan's support for anti-communist movements globally (1980s)
• George W. Bush's "freedom agenda" and Iraq invasion (2003)
• Pre-2016 Republican consensus on democracy promotion in Middle East

### III. Withdrawal and Non-Intervention

A. Isolationism

• Core principle: Minimize foreign entanglements, focus on domestic priorities
• Characteristics: Opposes alliances, military commitments, and international institutions
• Historical examples:
• US neutrality acts and refusal to join League of Nations (1920s-1930s)
• America First Committee opposition to WWII entry (pre-Pearl Harbor)

### IV. Hybrid and Contextual Approaches

A. Selective Engagement

• Core principle: Intervene strategically in areas of vital interest while avoiding overcommitment
• Characteristics: Pragmatic case-by-case assessment, coalition-building where useful
• Historical examples:
• Clinton's intervention in Balkans but avoidance of Rwanda (1990s)
• George H.W. Bush's coalition-based Gulf War but restraint on "going to Baghdad"

## Questions for Discussion

1. Is the Trump administration's approach best understood as realpolitik (rational pursuit of resources and interests), machpolitik (reckless power assertion), or something else entirely?
2. Can we identify clear historical parallels—or are the current circumstances genuinely novel?
3. How do resource constraints and multipolarity reshape these traditional frameworks? Does scarcity make realpolitik more necessary, or does it create conditions for machpolitik's dangers?
4. When does pragmatic realism cross the line into destabilizing machpolitik? What are the warning signs?
5. Has the post-Cold War consensus around liberal internationalism collapsed? If so, what has replaced it?

Come prepared to debate, refine this taxonomy, and apply it to the foreign policy challenges we face today.