When ABC News’ Martha Raddatz asked four national security thinkers to list top priorities for the new administration, discussion at the U.S. Institute of Peace “Passing the Baton” conference swung quickly to the pros and cons of disruption—specifically, President-elect Trump’s spontaneous declarations, via Twitter, on foreign affairs. 

panel

“I’m going to try to be polite,” said former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright in the first of three panel discussions that made up part of the conference Jan. 9 and 10. “I’m very concerned about the tweets.” Policies are shaped by careful work and explained to other governments via diplomatic channels to ensure clarity and accuracy, she said. The tweets risk “destroying” systematic work of government systems, Albright said.

Admiral James Stavridis, the former NATO commander, said social media posts have a place in a communications strategy, but off-the-cuff presidential tweets could disrupt chains of command. “Let’s say a tweet appears that says ‘Hey, the next Iranian gunboat that crosses the bow of a U.S. Navy ship is going to get blown out of the water,’” Stavridis said. That “has an effect, all the way down to that young commanding officer” in “rules-of-engagement moments. … You potentially kind of create this short circuit,” he said. “I think it can be the same in diplomacy” or economics.

“Let me actually embrace the tweets,” said the Atlantic Council’s Frederick Kempe. “Unpredictability … can be useful politically “on many issues.” Still, “on the global stage, the U.S. has to be predictable. Its allies have to know where it stands. Its adversaries have to know where it stands.”

The “overarching” question for Kempe was, “Can we save, adjust, reinvigorate the global system of practices, values” that has included a cohesive Europe but is threatened by Russia and by upheaval from the Middle East? China’s role in weakening or strengthening a rules-based international regime will be critical, he said. 

For Stavridis, cyber security will be a big challenge. “In cyber we have the greatest mismatch between the level of threat—which is quite high—and our level of preparation, which is quite low,” he said. 

Senator Tom Cotton offered three “priorities that would fundamentally advantage the United States in strategic competition.” He suggested “substantial increases in our defense budget” and a “thorough-going review of our strategic posture,” notably in nuclear armament, because of recent Russian and Chinese nuclear-weapons developments. And, he urged, “accelerate the shale revolution in American energy production” to strengthen the United States as “a global energy superpower.”


Related Publications

China’s Dilemmas Deepen as North Korea Enters Ukraine War

China’s Dilemmas Deepen as North Korea Enters Ukraine War

Thursday, November 14, 2024

Until late October, the big questions about China’s role in the Ukraine conflict centered around whether Beijing would choose to expand its support for Russia to include lethal aid, or if it might engage in more active peacemaking to end the conflict. Then, on November 4, the Pentagon confirmed that North Korea sent more than 10,000 troops to Russia’s Kursk oblast, where Ukraine had captured some territory earlier this year. Days later, the State Department confirmed that North Korean soldiers had begun fighting Ukrainian troops.

Type: Analysis

Conflict Analysis & PreventionGlobal Policy

How Should Seoul Respond to North Korea's Soldiers in Russia?

How Should Seoul Respond to North Korea's Soldiers in Russia?

Wednesday, November 13, 2024

The Ukraine war is taking a new turn with the involvement of North Korean soldiers. Washington estimates that, so far, North Korea has sent approximately 10,000 troops to Russia — around 8,000 of whom have been deployed to the western region of Kursk, where Ukraine seized territory in a surprise attack earlier this year. And as U.S. officials predicted in late October, North Korean troops have reportedly begun engaging in direct combat.

Type: Analysis

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

Australia’s Strategic Thinking on the War in Ukraine, NATO, and Indo-Pacific Security

Australia’s Strategic Thinking on the War in Ukraine, NATO, and Indo-Pacific Security

Tuesday, November 12, 2024

Russia’s war against Ukraine has spurred closer cooperation between Euro-Atlantic and Indo-Pacific states and organizations, particularly Australia and NATO, signaling a deepening of ties that could have long-term benefits for global security. Over the long term, writes security expert Gorana Grgić, such alignment is crucial for signaling to potential aggressors that global coalitions are prepared to respond. This report analyzes Australia’s response in order to examine Canberra’s strategic thinking with respect to cross-theater cooperation, and it offers recommendations for US, NATO, and Australian policymakers.

Type: Special Report

Conflict Analysis & PreventionGlobal Policy

Many Ways to Fail: The Costs to China of an Unsuccessful Taiwan Invasion

Many Ways to Fail: The Costs to China of an Unsuccessful Taiwan Invasion

Tuesday, November 5, 2024

A Chinese invasion of Taiwan would be an extremely difficult military, complex operation. China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has been thinking seriously since the early 2000s about what such a landing would require. For over two decades, its force development efforts have been focused on the weapons, equipment, doctrine and operational concepts required to conquer the island in the face of full U.S. military intervention. The PLA has made considerable progress toward that goal and may deem itself fully capable by the 2027 force development target set by Xi Jinping.

Type: Analysis

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

View All Publications