The Next George Kennan: Does the World Need One? DeMarco Banter

Gimme a ticket for an aeroplane
Ain’t got time to take a fast train
Lonely days are gone, I’m a-goin’ home
My baby, just a wrote me a letter. –The Boxtops, 1967

Who is the next George Kennan?

George Kennan was a prominent American diplomat and historian, best known for his successful advocacy of a “policy of containment” of Soviet expansion during the Cold War. He is widely regarded as one of the most important figures in the formation of U.S. foreign policy during the 20th century.

Who is the “next George Kennan”?

1. A leading thinker in the field of U.S. foreign policy, particularly with respect to great power competition (as Kennan was during the Cold War).
2. An advocate for a specific strategy or approach to a major foreign policy challenge, similar to Kennan’s advocacy for containment.
3. A diplomat or policy expert who ends up having a significant influence on U.S. foreign policy.

KENNAN IN THE 21st CENTURY

There probably isn’t a specific individual who has been recognized or acclaimed as the “next George Kennan.” However, there is discussion about the need for such a figure in the context of dealing with the challenges posed by China. Some commentators have argued that the situation with China today is similar to what the United States faced with the Soviet Union after World War II, when George Kennan’s ideas about containment were instrumental in shaping American foreign policy. They suggest that a new strategic thinker like Kennan is needed to guide the U.S.’s approach to China, a task that they see as one of the greatest challenges that American diplomacy has ever faced​1​.

George Kennan was influential and a geopolitical thinker in developing the idea of containment. He was respected by key post-war leaders like Secretaries of State George Marshall and Dean Acheson, Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal, and President Harry Truman​2​.

Kennan’s primary contribution was the “long telegram” he sent from the U.S. embassy in Moscow in 1946. In it, he warned that the Soviet Union would pursue expansionist policies through ideological proselytizing, espionage, and subversion of neighboring states, not just military means. His analysis convinced American leaders of the need for a U.S. response to Soviet expansionism, and his ideas became influential in shaping public opinion and U.S. foreign policy during the early years of the Cold War​2​.

Kennan’s containment strategy was multidimensional, not purely military but also emphasized economic and diplomatic means to counter Soviet expansionism. He believed in building the economic strength of the U.S. and its allies to counter the appeal of communism, and he saw sensitive diplomacy as a key element of American global leadership. He acknowledged that military responses might sometimes be necessary but saw these as secondary to economic and diplomatic responses​2​.

The Truman administration initially applied Kennan’s prescriptions by extending aid to Greece and Turkey and launching the European Recovery Program (or Marshall Plan) to counter Soviet influence in Western Europe. However, later policy shifts towards military preparedness occurred in response to Soviet military initiatives​2​.

In the current geopolitical landscape, there is a definite need for a similar kind of strategic thinking to guide the U.S.’s approach to China. However, identifying a leader who is widely regarded as the “next George Kennan” is a challenge at best.

THE COLD WAR

The Cold War was a period of intense ideological and geopolitical competition between the United States and the Soviet Union, and several key individuals rose to prominence as geo-strategists during this time. Here are some of the most notable figures:

1. George Kennan: An American diplomat and historian, Kennan is often credited as the intellectual author of the Containment Doctrine, which formed the foundation of American strategy during the early years of the Cold War. His “Long Telegram” from Moscow in 1946 and subsequent “X Article” titled “The Sources of Soviet Conduct” laid out the case for a long-term, patient but firm and vigilant containment of Russia’s expansive tendencies​1​.
2. Henry Kissinger: Serving as National Security Advisor and later Secretary of State under Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, Kissinger was a significant influence on U.S. foreign policy during the Cold War. His approach to international relations, which emphasized power balances and realpolitik, helped shape the policy of détente with the Soviet Union, the opening of relations with China, and the end of the Vietnam War.
3. Zbigniew Brzezinski: Brzezinski served as President Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor and was a significant force behind the administration’s foreign policy. He was known for his hardline stance on the Soviet Union, played a key role in the normalization of U.S.-China relations, and was instrumental in providing support to the Afghan mujahideen in their fight against Soviet occupation, a policy that was part of what came to be known as the “Brzezinski Doctrine.”
4. Paul Nitze: Nitze served in various roles in the State Department, the Defense Department, and on the National Security Council. He was a key contributor to NSC-68, a top-secret document that provided the strategic outline for increased U.S. expenditures to counter the perceived threat of Soviet expansionism.
5. John Foster Dulles: As Secretary of State under President Dwight D. Eisenhower, Dulles was a significant figure in early Cold War U.S. foreign policy. He was a strong proponent of a policy of “massive retaliation” against Soviet aggression, and he also played a key role in the creation of the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO), a collective defense pact designed to contain the spread of communism in Southeast Asia.
6. Dean Acheson: As Secretary of State under President Harry Truman, Acheson played a key role in defining American foreign policy during the early years of the Cold War. He helped design the Marshall Plan and was a key player in the creation of NATO.

Each of these individuals contributed to the development and execution of U.S. foreign policy during the Cold War, and their ideas and strategies have left a lasting impact on international relations. Who are our modern-day geostrategists?

WHAT IS A GEOSTRATEGIST

A geostrategist is a person who (shockingly) practices geostrategy, which is the geographical direction of a nation’s foreign policy. More precisely, geostrategy involves the practice and planning of a nation’s security and foreign policy based on its geographic characteristics, the geopolitical climate, and the diplomatic relationships with other countries.

A geostrategist studies and analyses factors such as the geographic location of a country, its resources, its alliances and rivalries, and its demographic trends to formulate strategies that can maximize its national interest and security. The work of a geostrategist can heavily influence a country’s foreign policy, military strategy, and international relations.

Prominent geostrategists have often played significant roles in shaping the course of history. For example, George Kennan is often considered a leading geostrategist of the 20th century for his role in shaping U.S. foreign policy during the early years of the Cold War.

Geostrategy, as we understand it today, is a transdisciplinary field, combining political science, geography, economics, and military science, to inform the strategic policy and planning.

Halford Mackinder, a British geographer in the late 19th and early 20th century, is often considered one of the earliest geostrategists. His 1904 article, “The Geographical Pivot of History,” introduced what is now known as the Heartland Theory, a central concept in geopolitics and geostrategy. According to this theory, controlling the “Heartland” (the core area of the Eurasian continent) would provide the key to world dominance.

That said, the concepts underlying geostrategy have been considered by many strategists, rulers, and military leaders throughout history. For instance, ancient strategists such as Sun Tzu and Thucydides took geography into account when planning military strategies. In the Western tradition, Carl von Clausewitz, a Prussian general and military theorist, discussed the importance of geography for military strategy, although he didn’t formulate a comprehensive theory of geostrategy.

Ultimately, while Mackinder can be seen as a pioneer in formal geostrategic thought, the principles of geostrategy have been integral to strategic thinking throughout history.

MODERN STRATEGISTS 

Some of the most prominent strategists of the current day include:

1. Shanker Singham: He is a former US advisor and a key figure in the current debates on competition, trade, and anti-trust law. Singham is also a leading thinker on how free trade can counter China’s rise as a superpower​1​.
2. Wang Yi: Serving as the Foreign Minister and China’s State Councilor, Wang is an influential figure in shaping China’s international strategy and policy​3​.

Shanker Singham is a prominent international trade lawyer and competition policy expert. He’s been influential in shaping policy in the UK and the US, among other jurisdictions. His work focuses on using trade and competition policy to drive prosperity. He held the position of CEO of Competere, an organization focusing on trade and competition policy.

Wang Yi (Chinese: 王毅) is a senior Chinese diplomat and politician who has served as the State Councilor of the People’s Republic of China and the Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs since March 2013.

Born in 1953, Wang Yi is a career diplomat with extensive experience in Asian affairs, having previously served as the Director of the Taiwan Affairs Office. He is fluent in Japanese and is considered an expert on China’s relationships with Japan and the Koreas.

In his role as Foreign Minister, Wang Yi is responsible for implementing the Chinese Communist Party’s foreign policy. As of my knowledge cutoff in September 2021, he had been at the forefront of China’s diplomatic efforts, including its relations with the United States, its territorial disputes in the South China Sea, and its role in international organizations.

US GEOSTRATEGISTS and INNOVATION

Innovation plays a significant role in geostrategy across several dimensions. Here are a few ways in which this can occur:

1. Technological innovation: Advancements in technology can drastically reshape the geopolitical landscape. For example, the development of nuclear weapons in the 20th century fundamentally altered the balance of power and strategic calculus among nations. More recently, innovations in cyber technology, artificial intelligence, satellite imagery, and drone technology are reshaping defense strategies, surveillance capabilities, and warfare.
2. Economic innovation: Innovations that drive economic growth can also influence geostrategy. For instance, the rise of digital economies and cryptocurrencies are changing traditional economic structures and hence, global power dynamics.
3. Energy Innovation: Advancements in renewable energy technologies are altering the strategic importance of oil-rich regions, impacting geostrategy on a global scale. Nations with the capability to harness and control new energy sources can wield significant geopolitical power.
4. Communication Innovation: Innovations in communication technology, like the Internet and social media, have implications for soft power strategies, intelligence gathering, and public diplomacy.
5. Innovation in Transportation: Developments in transportation technology, like the rise of high-speed rail or the potential advent of commercial space travel, can also affect geostrategy by changing patterns of global connectivity and influence.

In essence, any major innovation can shift the relative power and influence of nations, thus reshaping geostrategic considerations. As such, countries often aim to foster innovation in strategically important sectors, such as technology or energy, as a means of enhancing their geopolitical standing.

KENNAN AND INNOVATION

George F. Kennan’s Long Telegram, sent from the U.S. Embassy in Moscow to the Department of State in Washington D.C. in 1946, was a seminal document in the early Cold War period.

While it may not be appropriate to describe Kennan’s insights in the Long Telegram as “innovations” in the technological sense, his strategic analysis and policy recommendations certainly represented innovative thinking in geopolitical and strategic terms. Here’s how:

1. Novel Framework for Understanding the USSR: Kennan offered a groundbreaking interpretation of Soviet motivations and actions. He described the USSR’s worldview as being driven by a combination of Marxist-Leninist ideology and traditional Russian insecurity, leading to an inherent hostility towards the West that could not be reconciled through conventional diplomatic means.
2. Containment Policy: Kennan’s most significant contribution in the Long Telegram was the formulation of the “containment” policy. This was a novel strategic concept at the time, suggesting that rather than trying to overtly defeat the USSR, the U.S. and its allies should focus on preventing the expansion of Soviet influence.
3. Focus on Political and Economic Factors: Kennan’s recommendations stressed the importance of political and economic factors over military ones. This involved using economic aid, political influence, and ideological warfare to strengthen U.S. allies and resist Soviet pressures. This holistic approach was innovative, moving beyond a mere focus on military strength.
4. Long-term Strategic Perspective: Kennan’s analysis took a long-term perspective, recognizing that the competition with the Soviet Union would be a prolonged struggle. This helped set the stage for a long-term, strategic approach to the Cold War, rather than a series of short-term tactical decisions.

So while Kennan’s Long Telegram did not involve “innovation” in the way we might think of new technologies or inventions, it certainly involved innovative thinking in terms of geopolitical analysis and strategic policy formulation.

KENNAN AND LEADERSHIP

Leadership played a crucial role in the creation, reception, and implementation of the ideas outlined in George F. Kennan’s Long Telegram. Here are a few ways in which this is evident:

1. Kennan’s Leadership: As the Deputy Chief of Mission of the United States to the USSR at the time, Kennan demonstrated thought leadership by formulating a comprehensive and insightful analysis of Soviet intentions and capabilities, fundamentally shifting the understanding of the Soviet Union within the U.S. government. His nuanced understanding of Russian history and the ideological foundations of the Soviet state helped him construct a sophisticated perspective on their strategic posture.
2. Leadership Reception: The leadership in the State Department and White House, including Secretary of State James Byrnes and President Harry S. Truman, played a crucial role in receiving Kennan’s ideas and incorporating them into U.S. policy. Truman’s administration recognized the value in Kennan’s recommendations, leading to the adoption of containment as the cornerstone of U.S. Cold War strategy.
3. Implementing Leadership: Once the concept of containment was adopted, it required effective leadership to be implemented. This was seen in the enactment of the Truman Doctrine, the Marshall Plan, and the formation of NATO. Leaders in various positions within the U.S. government were responsible for executing these complex policies and strategies.
4. Influence on Subsequent Leaders: Kennan’s ideas not only shaped the policies of the Truman administration, but they also influenced subsequent leaders throughout the Cold War. Containment became the guiding doctrine for U.S. foreign policy towards the USSR, guiding the decisions of presidents from Truman to Reagan.

So in short, leadership was critical at every step of the process related to the Long Telegram – from the creation of the ideas it contained, to their reception at the highest levels of government, to the implementation and maintenance of the strategies it recommended.

A REWRITE OF THE LONG TELEGRAM in the 21st CENTURY 

So how might one rewrite George Kennan’s Long Telegram in the context of today’s issues with China. Of course this is a hypothetical exercise based on my knowledge of the current affairs, and the comparison may not be perfect due to the significant differences between the USSR in the late 1940s and China in the early 2020s.

Subject: The Prolonged Challenge: Understanding Today’s China

To: State Department

From: United States Embassy in Beijing

At the core of our dealings with China today, we must first recognize the ideological and political dynamics of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). This regime, like all authoritarian regimes, seeks to consolidate and maintain its own power and control. The CCP maintains a stranglehold on political power through stringent domestic censorship, control over information, and a relentless narrative emphasizing nationalism and the CCP’s irreplaceability.

It is also important to understand China’s economic model, which is characterized by a hybrid blend of state capitalism and free market principles. The state plays a key role in strategic sectors, while private enterprises are encouraged to compete in the global market, though always under the party’s watchful eye.

China’s foreign policy reflects a strategic design to reshape the international system in a manner beneficial to its interests. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is a testament to this grand strategy, as it is used to establish a network of trade routes and secure crucial supply chains that could potentially increase China’s global influence.

Like the USSR of yesteryears, China does not see a co-existence of differing political systems as a long-term solution. While not seeking direct confrontation, it is intent on establishing a world order that aligns with its ideological and economic principles.

We may not be in a new Cold War, but the challenges we face with China are significant and long-term. The situation calls for a strategy that combines containment and engagement. We must counteract China’s attempts to undermine liberal values and norms, but also engage where there is common ground, such as on climate change or pandemic response.

We must take a firm stand on human rights issues and speak out against the oppressive policies in regions like Xinjiang and Hong Kong. We need to work with our allies and partners around the world to present a united front against such practices.

To compete economically, we must invest in our own technological capabilities, infrastructure, and education. We need to address the vulnerabilities in our supply chains and protect our technological edge. We must also push back against unfair trade practices and forced technology transfers.

In dealing with China, we must be patient and persistent. We need a clear and coherent strategy that is flexible enough to adapt to changes. This is not about containing China’s rise, but about ensuring that it happens within a framework that respects international norms and values.

Finally, we should remember that our ultimate objective is not to create an enemy, but to ensure a world where freedom, democracy, and human rights are respected. Our policy should reflect our commitment to these principles and our willingness to defend them.

Signed,

TODAY’S GEOSTRATEGIST