Let’s Think About Not Having a Strategy
By The gist of my latest at the Diplomat:
In the shadow of Iraq, “muddling through,” “retrenchment,” or “restraint” all look a bit more attractive. Arecent post by Xavier Marquez gives some historical heft to the argument for strategic inscrutability by examining the career of Francisco Franco. Marquez suggests that Franco survived for such a long time because of the coalition he represented was “inherently contradictory, yet could only act through him.” Inscrutability, the capacity not to make a decision, or even to hint at what he really wanted, allowed Franco to manage internal divisions and external opponents.
Marquez’ point emphasizes the “strategic” part of grand strategy. Strategic decision-making is, by definition, part of a game that includes more than one player. While some games favor the player who chooses first (and thus defines the terms under which the other players decide), not all do. Not deciding, but rather of waiting until the other players have revealed their intentions and committed themselves to particular courses of action, maximizes flexibility and maintains strategic options.
And of course: