Strategika

Subscribe to receive Strategika. Subscribe »

Thursday, July 11, 2019

Issue 59

U.S.–China Trade Tensions
Background Essay
Background Essay

Trade War 2.0—China Sets Sail to Import Innovation, Export Governance

by Christopher R. O’Deavia Strategika
Thursday, July 11, 2019

By agreeing to restart stalled trade talks at their meeting in Osaka last week, President Trump and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping averted a new round of punitive measures in a trade conflict that’s moving into its second year.

Featured Commentary
Featured Commentary

When “Trade Wars” End Badly

by Gordon G. Changvia Strategika
Thursday, July 11, 2019

“I think we’re going to be strategic partners,” said President Donald Trump on June 29 at his Osaka G-20 press conference, in response to a question from Olivia Qi Zhang, a reporter for Caixin, the Chinese news organization. “I think we can help each other. I think, in the end, we can—if the right deal is structured, we can be great for each other.”

Featured Commentary

Demystifying Sino-U.S. Decoupling

by Michael R. Auslinvia Strategika
Thursday, July 11, 2019

“He’s a New York real estate developer,” a non-politically involved acquaintance argues, explaining that President Donald Trump knows that any deal as complex as the one he is trying to negotiate with China over trade will take time, “even years.” That explanation may be as valid as any of the ostensibly more informed takes by professional policy watchers. It also is a useful caution against placing artificial, media-driven timetables on what is turning into the most significant policy showdown between Washington and Beijing since the normalization of diplomatic ties forty years ago.

E.g., 7 / 19 / 2019
E.g., 7 / 19 / 2019
Monday, June 25, 2018

Issue 51

Nuclear Proliferation

Background Essay

by Gordon G. Chang Monday, June 25, 2018
article

Featured Commentary

by Thomas Donnelly Monday, June 25, 2018
article
by Thomas Karako Monday, June 25, 2018
article
Thursday, April 26, 2018

Issue 50

Pakistan's Partnership with the United States

Background Essay

by Peter R. Mansoor Thursday, April 26, 2018
article

Featured Commentary

by Ralph Peters Thursday, April 26, 2018
article
by Bing West Thursday, April 26, 2018
article
Tuesday, March 27, 2018

Issue 49

The Value of Economic Sanctions

Background Essay

by Josef Joffe Thursday, March 29, 2018
article

Featured Commentary

by Angelo M. Codevilla Thursday, March 29, 2018
article
by Thomas Donnelly Thursday, March 29, 2018
article

Related Commentary

by Thomas H. Henriksen Tuesday, July 18, 2017
article
by Reuel Marc Gerecht, Mark Dubowitz Sunday, November 10, 2013
article
by Bruce Thornton Tuesday, July 21, 2015
article
by Thomas H. Henriksen Friday, October 30, 1998
article
Monday, February 26, 2018

Issue 48

U.S. Military Policy in Afghanistan

Background Essay

by Hy Rothstein, John Arquilla Monday, February 26, 2018
article

Featured Commentary

by Bing West Monday, February 26, 2018
article
by Max Boot Monday, February 26, 2018
article

Related Commentary

by Thomas Donnelly Monday, February 26, 2018
article
by Mark Moyar Monday, February 26, 2018
article
by Ralph Peters Monday, February 26, 2018
article

Pages

Explore Research

Filter By:

Topic

Type

Author

Section

Enter comma-separated IDs of authors
Enter comma-separated IDs of contributors

Support the Hoover Institution

Join the Hoover Institution's community of supporters in advancing ideas defining a free society.

Support Hoover

Related Commentary

Europe Lacks the Will to Defend Itself

by Bing West via Strategika
Thursday, January 17, 2019

The Hoover Institution at Stanford University posed this question—Will NATO Europe fully partner with the U.S., or continue to downplay military readiness? The brief answer is that the leading economic powers in Europe have moved beyond national defense into a never-never land of post-military globalism. The liminal leap into self-induced delusion assumes that major conflict will never again embroil the European continent. So there isn’t enough money for a credible military force in Europe because there is not the political will. The moral is to the physical as four to one in battle, and Europe lost the spirit to fight long ago.

Related Commentary

The European Alliance That Never Was

by Angelo M. Codevillavia Strategika
Thursday, January 17, 2019

The notion of an Atlantic alliance consisting of Europeans and Americans as full partners was once a useful fiction. Today it is a dysfunctional one, an obstacle to all sides’ understanding of what useful cooperation may yet be possible.

Strategika Issue 55: The Structure of World Power

via Strategika
Friday, November 16, 2018

Strategika Issue 55 is now available online. Strategika is an online journal that analyzes ongoing issues of national security in light of conflicts of the past—the efforts of the Military History Working Group of historians, analysts, and military personnel focusing on military history and contemporary conflict.

Related Commentary

America on Top

by Miles Maochun Yuvia Strategika
Thursday, November 15, 2018

Since the end of the Cold War, the United States has been the lone superpower that, if it’s so willing, can exert preponderant influence over the global, geostrategic, and geopolitical order. In a true sense, a bipolar or multi-polar world order whereby the U.S. is of equal status and influence with another “pole” or “poles” does not really exist.

Related Commentary

Regional Bipolarity, The New Global Model

by Ralph Petersvia Strategika
Thursday, November 15, 2018

The United States’ superpower monopoly endures, but only in the western hemisphere. There is no regional military or economic competitor, and ideological challengers have failed or remain strategically marginal. Elsewhere, the emerging model is regional bipolarity coincident with global economic tri-polarity (United States, China, European Union).

Related Commentary

A Different Path to Global Stability

by Chris Gibson via Strategika
Thursday, November 15, 2018

The global strategic landscape is clearly evolving beyond U.S. hegemony, presenting both challenges and opportunities for our national leaders.

Related Commentary

A Wobbling Goliath

by Giselle Donnellyvia Strategika
Thursday, November 15, 2018

Describing the balance of power by way of “poles,” the analytical framework so favored in recent decades by professional political scientists, is no longer that useful. 

Related Commentary

There Is Only One Superpower

by Gordon G. Changvia Strategika
Thursday, November 15, 2018

“China has overtaken the U.S. in all respects,” said Tsinghua University professor Hu Angang last year.

Background Essay

The Structure of the Contemporary International System

by Josef Joffevia Strategika
Thursday, November 15, 2018

A monopoly obtains when one firm is free to set prices and output while keeping ambitious newcomers out of the market. The best example is Standard Oil in the late 19th century. Ruthlessly undercutting competitors, the company ended up controlling 90 percent of refined oil flows in the United States. The United States never had that kind of overweening power in the international “market.” It may have come close to unipolarity in the 1990s when its mortal rival, the Soviet Union, had committed suicide. Yet the contemporary world is no longer unipolar. Neither is it bi- or multipolar.

Featured Commentary

Seeking Stability In The Structure of Power

by Seth Cropseyvia Strategika
Thursday, November 15, 2018

The global strategic landscape is moving away from the primacy that America achieved over the last century. New terrain includes the possibility of great power competition, a return to the bipolarity that policy-makers in the immediate post-Cold War said must never happen again. Current sentiment in the U.S. illustrates that there are worse possibilities than bipolarity.

Pages


The Working Group on the Role of Military History in Contemporary Conflict strives to reaffirm the Hoover Institution's dedication to historical research in light of contemporary challenges, and in particular, reinvigorating the national study of military history as an asset to foster and enhance our national security. Read more.

Is there a military solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

Stay Up To Date!

Be notified when an new issue is available.

Subscriptions »

RSS Feed Subscription

subscribe and listen on iTunes

Strategika is an online journal that analyzes ongoing issues of national security in light of conflicts of the past—the efforts of the Military History Working Group of historians, analysts, and military personnel focusing on military history and contemporary conflict.

Our board of scholars shares no ideological consensus other than a general acknowledgment that human nature is largely unchanging. Consequently, the study of past wars can offer us tragic guidance about present conflicts—a preferable approach to the more popular therapeutic assumption that contemporary efforts to ensure the perfectibility of mankind eventually will lead to eternal peace. New technologies, methodologies, and protocols come and go; the larger tactical and strategic assumptions that guide them remain mostly the same—a fact discernable only through the study of history.

To stay up to date when new issues are released, sign up here to be notified when a new Strategika is available.

Subscriptions »

 

The opinions expressed in Strategika are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Hoover Institution or Stanford University.