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
-
Turmoil in Paris and Berlin Going into a Second Trump Term
Podcast
Earlier this week, France’s government collapsed following a successful no-confidence vote from left-wing and far-right lawmakers. This political crisis comes on the heels of ...
By Andrea Kendall-Taylor, Jim Townsend, Tara Varma & Liana Fix
-
Trump and the War in Ukraine with Michael Kofman and Robert Lee
Podcast
More than 1000 days into the War in Ukraine, questions about continued support for the Ukrainian effort and the prospect of a negotiated settlement in the months to come have ...
By Andrea Kendall-Taylor, Jim Townsend, Rob Lee & Mike Kofman
-
RUSI Recording: The Impact of the U.S. Presidential Election on European Security
Video
Jim Townsend, an adjunct senior fellow in the CNAS Transatlantic Security Program, joins RUSI to discuss the impact the next US presidential administration will have on NATO, ...
By Jim Townsend
-
Sharper: Trump 2.0
Commentary
Donald Trump's return to the White House is widely expected to reshape America's global priorities. With personnel choices and policy agendas that mark a significant break fro...
By Charles Horn & Gwendolyn Nowaczyk
