Every state wants to design an effective grand strategy, which will lead it to prosperity and peace. However, designing and implementing such strategy requires high-level intellectual activity, many resources and time. In my essay, I will argue that superpowers should definitely have a grand strategy to carry out their foreign policy and smaller states do not have a capability to create grand strategies. My essay will be structured in the following way. Firstly, I will give a definition of grand strategy and show that various academics in the field understand the term differently. Secondly, I will list the ingredients of grand strategy and reveal why those are always different. Thirdly, I am going to explain that it is beneficial for superpowers
…show more content…
Moreover, due to the scarcity of resources every nation has to prioritize some policies at the expense of others. In this paragraph, I will compare the elements of US grand strategy to the components of Chinese grand strategy. The elements of the US grand strategy has been changing and evolving over time. Paul Miller argues that there are five pillars of the modern American grand strategy: defending the homeland, maintaining the balance of power, punishing rogue actors, spreading democratic values and countering the insurgencies caused by terrorism. I would partly agree with the list of Miller, in my view, the United States is not trying to maintain the balance of power in different regions as Paul is arguing but rather is trying to keep its dominant position in those regions. Currently, the United States is involved in the affairs of every region of the globe and as any realist would argue, one of the key strategic aims should be protecting its place in the world order. Furthermore, I believe that the list of the ingredients could also include the American sense of exceptionalism. The idea of American exceptionalism goes deeply in the history of the United States; it was firstly used by John Winthrop, an English lawyer who led one of the first waves of immigration to New England. In accordance with his view, the New England …show more content…
Spread of the cultural ideas and principles has historically, been the main ingredient. However, when China has firstly faced powerful outsiders it had to adopt to the new realities. Today, Сhinese grand strategy is to protect its sovereignty, the need to take advantage from their geographical position and economic capabilities. There are two opposing opinions in the discussion of the Chinese grand strategy. There are academics who believe that the grand strategy of China will aggressively intersect with the American grand strategy, which will cause security problems and there are academics who believe in the peaceful rise of China. Wang Jisi claims that Chinese political aims are concentrated on finding the solutions to the domestic problems rather than challenging the United States. In accordance with the view of the author, Chinese grand strategy includes maintaining Chinese political stability (stability of the CCP leadership), sovereign security, keeping territorial integrity and sustainable economic growth. Personally, I support the view that Chinese grand strategy is mainly defensive rather than offensive and I do not see enough evidence to claim the opposite. For example, the decision of the American government to sell weapons to South Korea and Taiwan in 2010 (Chinese regional
Moreover, due to the scarcity of resources every nation has to prioritize some policies at the expense of others. In this paragraph, I will compare the elements of US grand strategy to the components of Chinese grand strategy. The elements of the US grand strategy has been changing and evolving over time. Paul Miller argues that there are five pillars of the modern American grand strategy: defending the homeland, maintaining the balance of power, punishing rogue actors, spreading democratic values and countering the insurgencies caused by terrorism. I would partly agree with the list of Miller, in my view, the United States is not trying to maintain the balance of power in different regions as Paul is arguing but rather is trying to keep its dominant position in those regions. Currently, the United States is involved in the affairs of every region of the globe and as any realist would argue, one of the key strategic aims should be protecting its place in the world order. Furthermore, I believe that the list of the ingredients could also include the American sense of exceptionalism. The idea of American exceptionalism goes deeply in the history of the United States; it was firstly used by John Winthrop, an English lawyer who led one of the first waves of immigration to New England. In accordance with his view, the New England …show more content…
Spread of the cultural ideas and principles has historically, been the main ingredient. However, when China has firstly faced powerful outsiders it had to adopt to the new realities. Today, Сhinese grand strategy is to protect its sovereignty, the need to take advantage from their geographical position and economic capabilities. There are two opposing opinions in the discussion of the Chinese grand strategy. There are academics who believe that the grand strategy of China will aggressively intersect with the American grand strategy, which will cause security problems and there are academics who believe in the peaceful rise of China. Wang Jisi claims that Chinese political aims are concentrated on finding the solutions to the domestic problems rather than challenging the United States. In accordance with the view of the author, Chinese grand strategy includes maintaining Chinese political stability (stability of the CCP leadership), sovereign security, keeping territorial integrity and sustainable economic growth. Personally, I support the view that Chinese grand strategy is mainly defensive rather than offensive and I do not see enough evidence to claim the opposite. For example, the decision of the American government to sell weapons to South Korea and Taiwan in 2010 (Chinese regional