Grand strategy is a causal argument about how to achieve national security. To do so, it seeks to control a situation to realize prioritized national interests. For example, a certain level of economic growth, a relative or qualitative increase in military power, or the possession of a key geographic feature.
By definition, these interests are of serious or grave importance to the nation-state in question. They are believed — by the leaders of the nation-state in question — to be the constituent parts of said nation-state’s national security.
Because of the innate importance innate importance of such prioritized national interests, grand strategy has at its disposal the full panoply of resources and instruments of power available to the given nation-state to initiate a sequence of events that will presumably generate the consequences necessary for control.
“Grand strategy is a term of art from academia, and refers to the collection
of plans and policies that comprise the state’s deliberate effort to harness
political, military, diplomatic, and economic tools together to advance that
state’s national interest.” — Peter Feaver
Whether the process is undertaken consciously or not, the formation of grand strategy begins with three simple questions. What is desired? What is possible? How will it be sought?
The videos below address various aspects of these three foundational questions. They raise questions about how we answer each individually and how the answers to each affect the answers to the others. They also highlight the costs of poorly thought out answers.
The Carnegie Council video below addresses grand strategic theory in practice from the ancient world through World War II and beyond highlights the trap of “one-size-fits-all” strategic thinking.
The Atlantic Council video below addresses how the organization and structures of government (even at the conceptual level) affects national instruments of power and the likelihood they will be well matched to grand strategy.