January 07, 2018
Bringing the national security debate beyond Washington
Washingtonians who work on national security often pride themselves on how much they know about the world. Many of the nation’s top security experts speak foreign languages and have spent years studying and working overseas. They read international journals, maintain networks of other experts around the world and travel frequently to international conferences. But the one thing those same national security professionals aren’t particularly good at doing is connecting with Americans outside of Washington. While they occasionally travel to their home states to visit family or friends and attend conferences in places like Ohio or Texas, the Washington national security community spends a lot of time talking to itself. This needs to change.
The reasons for Washington’s insularity are multifold. First, not everyone outside of Washington wants to join a discussion on the future of NAFTA or Nagorno-Karabakh. Second, many Washingtonians grew up outside of Washington, which leads them to sometimes falsely conclude that they understand how the rest of the country (or at least one corner of it) thinks. Third, national security jobs often require you to know more about the domestic politics of Germany or China than the United States. The end result has been a growing cadre of national security professionals who are out of touch with how their fellow citizens think about foreign policy.
Never was that more apparent than during the 2016 election. Sure, many in Washington were surprised that the country elected Donald Trump as its 45th president. But what many members of the national security community found more shocking was the way that detractors from both sides of the aisle attacked the bipartisan consensus on the importance of American engagement in the world. National security professionals — myself included — had failed to notice the growing disaffection among our fellow citizens with globalization. We also failed to notice (or refused to acknowledge) the shift in public views towards things like democracy promotion, global trade deals, the NATO alliance and nation building. After joking about the “Washington bubble” for years, Washingtonians have come to appreciate how much truth lies in that analogy.
Read the full op-ed in Deseret News.
More from CNAS
-
Ukraine Negotiations: Confusing Activity with Progress
The past week has seen a flurry of diplomacy from President Trump as he seeks to bring about a negotiated solution to Russia’s war on Ukraine. While activity has been undeniab...
By Andrea Kendall-Taylor, Jim Townsend, Samuel Charap & Dr. Angela Stent
-
Russia's Lavrov: Security Talks without Moscow a "Path to Nowhere" | CNN
Andrea Kendall-Taylor, senior fellow and program director at the Center for a New American Security, joins CNN to explain about the difficulties of negotiations are not territ...
By Andrea Kendall-Taylor
-
Our Experts Put the Kibosh on Hopes for Ukraine Peace Anytime Soon
There has been a diplomatic flurry around Ukraine in recent days, yet the theme of progress has been hollow words and flip-flopping. Is the White House serious about peace, or...
By Andrea Kendall-Taylor
-
What Does U.S. ‘Security Guarantees’ Mean for Ukraine?
Questions are mounting over what exactly "security guarantees" from the U.S. would entail for Ukraine. NBC News Senior White House Correspondent Garrett Haake reports the late...
By Andrea Kendall-Taylor