Recovering the Lost Art of Diplomacy

Imprimis ^ | FEBRUARY 2026 | A. Wess Mitchell

[Retain Mike]

Diplomacy is not surrender, and talking to an opponent is not a reward for good behavior. In dealings with China, Russia, or Iran, U.S. diplomatic initiatives must always be measured not by the process or optics—or by whether they support an abstract goal—but by whether the outcome results in greater or weaker constraints on a rival’s ability to harm us and our interests. Does it increase or decrease his dependency on us? Does it aid or complicate his ability to concentrate military power against us? Does it ease or impede his path of conquest?

A corollary has to do with allies. America has a larger number of allies than any great power in history. As a maritime power in the style of Venice and Britain, America benefits from having allies at the world’s chokepoints and in strategic regions. But diplomacy with allies, too, must be judged by its outcomes. Does the behavior of a particular ally ease or increase the concentration of U.S. military power against the main threat? Does it relieve or add to America’s burden in wartime? Does its trade policy help or hinder the goal of reindustrialization here at home in the face of the growing threat from China? Alliances that lack reciprocity in trade or do not share the burden in security need to be fixed. The goal is strategic renovation: to rebalance the ledger of burdens and benefits in U.S. alliances so that they are more favorable to the U.S. and therefore more sustainable.

---

TOPICS: Chit/Chat; History
KEYWORDS: art; awessmitchell; diplomacy; hillsdalecollege; michigan; tds

[Retain Mike]

He also says it is a good strategy to follow while you are reloading for the next war.

[ClearCase_guy]

The breakthrough in Gaza, efforts to end the war in Ukraine, the ongoing reform of American alliances, and efforts to renegotiate the trade relationship with China show that Americans are capable of wielding diplomacy as an instrument of strategic statecraft in the style of Teddy Roosevelt.

This is good.

I think that for decades, American "diplomacy" has been to give other countries virtually everything they want. Then, after their needs are met, we say, "Let's talk about what America gets in return." And the other country says "Can't help you." And we say, "Okay."

This is how you get deals like NAFTA -- Ross Perot knew there would be a giant sucking sound, but we did it anyway. And we (Obama) basically funded Iran's nuclear weapons program. Our past "diplomacy" efforts were really bad.

I like what Trump is doing.

[ComputerGuy]

Someone described peace as the time we spend standing around reloading.

[KarlInOhio]

America has a larger number of< allies ingrate dependents than any great power in history.

[Parmy]

Well, Chamberlain did keep Hitler out of Chezkoslovakia for a couple of weeks. Diplomacy gave Stalin all of Easter Europe and half of Germany. Diplomacy gave China the green light of rob the United States blind.

[Retain Mike]

LOL. Astute observation. I have table of GDP and debt I update regularly. People would probably list Australia, Canada, France, Germany, United Kingdom, Japan, Italy, and Poland among our allies with a combined GDP of 23.9 trillion. At that time our GDP was 30.6. Now how much of that wealth of our allies was devoted to military deterrence?

[Arkady]

Less Jaw-Jaw, more War-war. The U.N. is evil, the State Dept is worse.