At USIP’s Passing the Baton conference, former Obama administration officials Michéle Flournoy and Jacob Sullivan suggested that President-elect Donald Trump has raised unsettling questions about how he will conduct foreign policy and whether he will continue to meet historic U.S. commitments to institutions such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The incoming deputy national security advisor, KT McFarland, argued that new approaches by Trump, combined with a nimble attitude, will create opportunities for increased leverage abroad.

hadley mcfarland

“The new president is seizing an historic moment,” McFarland said in the last of three panel discussions that made up part of the conference Jan. 9 and 10. “That will create options.” She predicted that cheap energy along with regulatory and economic policy reforms will spark an “economic renaissance” strengthening Trump’s hand in world affairs.

The American people made clear in the election and recent polling that they don’t seek withdrawal from the world but feel they have carried too much of the burden, said Stephen Hadley, who served as national security advisor to President George W. Bush. Hadley called the sentiment a reasonable response that logically would be accompanied by rethinking elements of a post-World War II order that has long received bi-partisan support.

Yet Hadley said he is concerned that Western, democratic values are under attack in a new ideological contest, particularly by China and Russia, and that the United States must prepared to engage in that struggle.

Flournoy, a former under secretary of defense, said the presidential campaign had left confusion about whether the world should expect continuity or major shifts in U.S. positions. While it will take time for the Trump administration to formulate policies, “the world won’t wait,” she said. Some articulated guideposts are needed now to show that the country has “enduring national values,” she said.

In sometimes-contentious discussion over the Obama administration’s record and Trump’s criticisms of it, Sullivan said the tone of the presidential campaign raised questions whether any bi-partisan consensus still exists. Sullivan served as national security advisor to Vice President Joe Biden and as a top policy advisor to Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. He said he hopes the new administration uses diplomacy to pull the world together to defend values that include democracy, equality and pluralism.

“The mistake we make—and it’s not a partisan thing—is that we constantly tell other countries what to think,” McFarland said. U.S. foreign policy has been formulated from its long-held position as the world’s most powerful country, she said. “What I’m hoping in this transformational period is that we can start seeing things through others’ eyes.”

Moderator Susan Glasser, Politico’s chief international affairs columnist, asked where the first national security crisis for the new administration might come from. The panelists’ answers varied:

  • No state is more eager to provoke an international surprise than North Korea, Flournoy said. The administration could learn on Inauguration Day, she suggested, that North Korea has tested an intercontinental ballistic missile.
  • A major terror attack on Americans at home or abroad that has a “game-changing character” is a possibility, Hadley said.
  • The biggest immediate strategic threat is a “catastrophic event” in the United States set off by terrorists who “get their hands on weapons of mass destruction,” Sullivan said. Climate change is the only other challenge that “comes close to that level of absolute catastrophe and over the long term even exceeds it.”


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