Decline is a choice — America can’t return to isolationist policies

“Those who foolishly sought power on the back of a tiger ended up falling into the tiger.”

President John F. Kennedy proclaimed these words from the snow-covered steps of the U.S. Capitol during his inauguration. 1961 inaugural address. These were a clear warning to countries newly freed from the yoke of colonialism to resist the siren sounds of the Soviet communist movement.

But Kennedy also issued a subtle warning to his fellow Americans not to take their country's position as leader of the free world for granted.

When Kennedy spoke, it had been less than 14 years since Britain's ambassador to the United States delivered the “Blue Paper” to the State Department that effectively ended Britain's role as a world power. . He seized power and voluntarily transferred the role to the United States.

Today, more than 60 years after Kennedy pledged to “bear any burden” to ensure freedom's success, prominent voices on both sides of the current political climate are arguing for the United States to return to isolationist policies. are doing. Some leaders, echoing policy notes reminiscent of the 1930s, have cut military aid to Ukraine, scaled back engagement with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and even threatened China's support for Taiwan. It asks you to ignore the threat.

This view ignores the lessons of history. During World War II, millions of Americans made incredible sacrifices to keep the promise of freedom. In the aftermath of that conflict, Americans have benefited enormously from the implementation of the Atlantic Charter, the Bretton Woods Agreement, the creation of NATO, and the Marshall Plan for the Reconstruction of Europe, all of which were led by the United States. It is something that Forged.

This interwoven quilt of agreements was supported by American military power, a standing army, and by far the largest and most modern navy. This quilt helped the United States win the Cold War.

However, following Ronald Reagan's strategic victory (“We win, they lose''), America began to loosen its grip. Believing that our nation had won the final victory and that the “end of history” had somehow arrived, policymakers took the peace dividend, began a generation of defense cuts, and consolidated the defense industrial base. encouraged. China and the possibility of a revivalist Russia.

After the September 11 attacks, a generation of leaders on both sides of the political spectrum spent the nation's blood and treasure in Afghanistan and Iraq. And after making these significant strategic investments, they withdrew our military presence on a whim, in a haphazard manner that prioritized domestic politics over strategic imperatives.

In the aftermath of the past two decades, it's no surprise that Americans are tired and unwilling to make sacrifices. However, we cannot ignore the costs of such investments in our role as a global leader.

The past two administrations have developed national security strategies that frame competition with authoritarian powers such as China, Russia, and Iran in clear terms. This was a bipartisan foreign policy consensus to support Ukraine after it was invaded by Russia for territorial expansion purposes. This same agreement refocuses policy on strengthening Taiwan to deter attack by Communist China. And it was this consensus that sought to support and comfort its ally Israel after Hamas's barbaric terrorist attack on October 7, 2023.

Unfortunately, as we enter a hotly contested election year, there are voices on the far left and far right who want our country to abandon these allies and partners and return to our imagined state of splendid isolation.

These voices do not think about, or perhaps cannot imagine, what will happen in an era of diminished American influence and power abroad. They do not see the many destabilizing trends that would be caused if the United States tried to relinquish its position as world leader. Countries in Europe and Asia need to strengthen and prioritize their own defenses, and many are doing so, but it would be wise to downplay the many benefits that the post-World War II order has brought to the United States. Not.

Leadership comes at a cost, but it also comes with rewards. Our nation must step back and carefully consider its basic diplomatic, economic, and military calculations before relinquishing the benefits and burdens of global leadership and luring the rest of the free world to the backs of the Chinese Tiger. need to do it.

Todd Young is the senior senator from Indiana and a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Dr. Jerry Hendricks is a retired Navy captain and senior research fellow at Sagamore Research Institute.