Pacificus Principles Foreign policy restraint: The United States currently does not have a codified set of foreign policy principles to guide policymakers which is why we see inconsistencies when it comes to alliances or treaties such as joining the Iran Deal, then the next administration leaves the Iran Deal, then the next administration promises to rejoin. Pacificus was the pen name of Hamilton in seven letters arguing for US neutrality in the war between France and England. The following set of principles can help guide foreign policy; The United States recognizes and respects the national sovereignty of all countries regardless of the differences in culture, government structure, geography, natural resources, and legal protections of its citizens. The US should not interfere with any of these national differences unless provoked into conflict by that nation. The United States should remain out of alliances and treaties that alienate other nations but work towards ending universal threats such as nuclear proliferation. The United States is interested in expanding American values and rights abroad through popular sovereignty of those foreign nations and not military or economic force. Foreign Obligations In accordance with these principles, the United States should end all military alliances and any other foreign obligation that is not universal in nature. Such obligations that we should maintain would be nuclear arms treaties since nuclear warfare is a universal threat and does not obligate us to favor one country over the other. US efforts to combating climate change should be maintained. Military Assets Given the expanse of the US military due to the treaties we currently have, ending those treaties would require a major overhaul of military assets and operations. In order to separate ourselves from foreign conflicts, the United States should sell all army bases abroad to the nations that they reside in. To encourage these purchases, the Army generals in charge of the bases, with the support of the President, will decide which weapons, ammo, ordinances, vehicles, and fuel that is currently stationed at each base would be included in the purchases. Military Operations With the end of most operations, this should include all mercenary contracts including the subsidies and tax deductions, and exemptions to mercenary companies. Mercenary armies degrade America’s image and prevent the US from being neutral. Along with decreasing military operations, we should decrease foreign aid and end subsidies and tax deductions/exemptions to corporations that send aid abroad. Allocating Funds The decrease of US involvement means that we can allocate military funds to domestic projects; I suggest the US decrease the Army’s budget by 70%, from around $200 billion to $60 billion, and allocate $40 billion of that amount to the Navy, $10 billion to the Air Force, and $90 to domestic infrastructure. The infrastructure projects should include a fully developed and connected high-speed rail system and the renovation of our waterways. Since the money is from the Army and since infrastructure has a military purpose to it, the Army should oversee construction, development, maintenance, and operations of the rail system. As an incentive for the Army to speed up development, we should return the Army’s budget back to the prior amount once the infrastructure projects are complete. The money sent to the other two branches for research and development of defensive technologies and tactics to update our military. Trade Relations Since equal treatment is a principle of our foreign policy, we should end all sanctions on other countries and adopt a progressive tariff system that is based on the GDP of a nation along with the total trade of that nation and the individual industries themselves. For example, a nation that has a high GDP and billions of dollars worth of trade with the US will have a higher tariff rate than a nation with a small GDP and only millions of dollars worth of trade with the US. Individual industries of a country will also have their own tariff rate. This way we are encouraging purchases to smaller countries to alleviate the economic dependence America has on larger and more prosperous nations while supporting smaller nations. This will also normalize America’s relations with foreign nations since we will not be arbitrarily putting tariffs on nations simply because we don’t like them. United Nations This restraint does not mean isolationism from the international community and we should still have an open dialogue with every nation, share our medical and scientific research, collaborate on climate issues, and work with every country to deter nuclear armament and use. The United States should remain the host for the UN and support open dialogues between nations to deter conflicts worldwide which can only be done with foreign policy restraint.

Amending US Foreign Policy As mentioned in the last post which you can read here, US foreign policy is flawed in several ways. The first is the lack of consistency in policy and interpretation of goals between administrations. The second is that the policies themselves are flawed and unproductive. How to fix the problems facing grand US strategy abroad include codifying principles, establishing consistent and achievable goals, passing pragmatic and realistic policy, and have a system of observation, analysis, and amendments to keep everything running. Codifying Foreign Policy Principles Currently, there are no principles guiding US foreign policy; there are vague goals that generally remain the same throughout differing administrations, but those are not principles. A principle is a reciprocation concept that guides international relations. For example, Americans don’t like the idea of foreign governments interfering in their elections or trying to persuade Americans into supporting one political ideology over another. Americans value foreign countries respecting their national sovereignty. If the US actually held this principle of respect mutually, most of our current foreign policy would disappear since it includes interfering with the domestic affairs of foreign nations. I propose the following set of principles. The United States recognizes and respects the national sovereignty of all countries regardless of differences in culture, government structure, geography, natural resources, and legal protections of its citizens. The US should not interfere with any of these national differences unless provoked into conflict by that nation. The United States should remain out of alliances and treaties that alienate other nations but work towards ending universal threats such as nuclear proliferation. The United States should be interested in expanding American values and rights abroad but should do so through popular sovereignty and not through military or economic force. Establishing Principled Goals Appropriate goals can be set after principles are agreed upon. National security, advancing human rights, nuclear non-proliferation, even advancing democracy are all goals that can and should remain with the given principles above. The issue is that specific policies passed turned out to be detrimental to US international relations. Policy Policy is always tricky because of unintended consequences, changing interest groups, and incomplete information. Current US policy isn’t taking us closer to the goals set by the Department of State. The source of these problems is US entanglement in overlapping foreign affairs. For example, the US is collaborating with Turkey and the Kurds; the Kurds are an unofficial nation split up between several nations including Turkey. If Turkey gets what they want then the Kurds will be harmed; if the Kurds get what they want then that will build animosity and violence between the two groups. The photo below from the BBC shows the land claimed by the Kurds which is in conflict with several nations we are working with and working against. This is the Thucydides trap where alliances don’t prevent conflict but only exacerbate them by dragging in nations that have nothing to do with the conflict itself. I will write in-depth about an appropriate foreign policy that would address these issues in future blogs. A prelude includes dividing foreign policy into two branches the first called Pacificus and the second called Amicitia Americae. Amendments No grand strategy is complete, accurate, or long-lasting and so as the world changes so should policy. The constant cycle of observation, analysis, and amendments is the cycle to maintain appropriate legislation. This will be successful with well-funded research institutions to gather information about those changing environments. The willingness to adapt to changing circumstances by lawmakers is also essential to maintaining a well-regulated foreign policy.

With a new Presidential Administration, many are wondering what kind of changes we should see in regards to US foreign policy and international relations. President Biden halted the troop withdraws from several countries such as Germany and Syria. He stated in a press conference that "America is back" referring to US involvement in international affairs. You can read the full Biden speech on America's place in the world here. Under the Obama Administration, the Department of State issued a statement on the four goals of American foreign policy. You can read the full document here. These goals were adopted by the two following administrations. The issue is that despite the goals remaining the same, the different administrations have had vastly different foreign policies. This leads to the first issue with these goals and that is their interpretation. List of Goals Protect the United States and Americans; Advance democracy, human rights, and other global interests; Promote international understanding of American values and policies; and Support U.S. diplomats, government officials, and all other personnel at home and abroad who make these goals a reality. Foreign Policy Issues Protecting America Americans think of just the states when considering US protection but this policy includes military bases. In the past two decades, the only targets against the US have been the bases we hold in other countries especially in the Middle East. These bases, ironically, are the reason why we are being attacked in the first place. The governments in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan along with many others have voted to remove US troops and bases. The US has ignored these calls of demilitarization which shows that we do not respect the democratic process of the very nations we demand to be more democratic. This leads to the second issue of advancing democracy and human rights. Democratic Standards The US holds a high standard against China, Russia, Syria, and Iran when it comes to democracy and human rights but the US falls behind when it comes to holding our allies to those same standards. Most US allies consist of monarchs, theocratic states, some dictatorships, and many flawed democracies. Most notable is Saudi Arabia who has a monarch, is a theocratic state, and violates human rights within their own country and abroad such as in Yemen where they are backing a civil war. Although the US doesn't have a military alliance with Saudi Arabia, the US does send millions in aid and military equipment to them. Because of this and the US' other close relations with similar nations the rest of the world, especially the parts we are criticizing, view the US as being a hypocrite. American Trust This negative view hinders the progress of spreading American values abroad since no country favors the US form of democracy. Not only are we listed as a flawed democracy by the Economist Intelligence Unit in 2020, you can read the full report here, but democracies around the world do not share the same trilateral structure that the US has and instead have a unitary parliamentary system akin to the English. In short, US policies are not achieving their intended goals and the flip-flopping of those policies between administrations makes the US an unreliable ally and a poor example of stability and consistency which further hinders our progress to spread democracy and human rights. Fixing Foreign Policy There are several steps the US needs to accomplish in order to fix these issues and they are: Establish detailed and codified foreign policy principles. Establish detailed goals based on those principles. Pass policy that furthers the US to achieve those goals. Amend any policy or change any goal that turns out to be detrimental to those principles. I will go into further details about these steps in my next post.