National security strategy

US national security strategy reflects flaw in Western thinking: an antagonistic world view

The 19th Communist Party congress put China on the global stage, which has long been dominated by the United States. There’s no denying the two are caught in a Thucydides Trap, which warns that conflict may break out when an established power feels threatened by a rising power.

The problem is that the US does not believe China’s claim of a peaceful rise. After all, the Chinese have a proverb that says “a mountain cannot contain two tigers”. And Western philosophy is built on a history of dualistic contests, so the West views Chinese strategic intent through the lens of its own experience.

After the 19th congress, the US has only ratcheted up its containment strategy towards China. Its latest national security strategy spells it out: to engage with a divided world, especially to deal with the China threat, US foreign policy will be based on the doctrine of “principled realism”.

This doctrine recalls Hans Morgenthau’s theory of realism in international relations. The core logic of that influential theory is that a nation’s interests are maximised and protected by power. Such a perspective contrasts with the lofty aspirations that underline moral universalism.

But why “principled”? This is because the US needs to shore up its soft power and moral leadership, and turn US values into universal values.

Thus, the doctrine of principled realism seeks to find a balance between the Republican establishment’s focus on values and President Donald Trump’s focus on profit.