Book Reviews

Abstract

Two Approaches to Grand Strategy and the Uses of History Like Janus, grand strategy has two faces—one facing the future and the other the past. Grand Strategy builds on the assumption that men can use history to illuminate the dangers and foibles of the present and perhaps the near future. Grand strategy, although lacking an overarching definition or a set series of rules, has thematically in common the attempt to be useful to the present by deriving wisdom from history. One face of grand strategy, looking to the future, reduces the past’s complexity into applicable lessons. As Thucydides wrote, the human condition is such that a clear and precise understanding of past events is beneficial. What has happened will happen again. In contemporary parlance, this aspect of grand strategy is a part of policy making, and one potential definition of grand strategy is that type of intense, balanced consideration of ends and means occurring within an institutional framework, such as a government. Here, the goal is to make sense of complexity and enable leaders to make informed and rapid decisions. It is not possible to know all the facts or consider all potential choices. Understanding which policies and choices have worked and not worked in the past requires the skill to assemble the relevant evidence in order to make efficient policy—today an endeavor often assumed by the political scientist. However, humans all too easily find evidence to support the things they already believe—another aspect of human nature according to Thucydides. The danger of seeking to make the past useful is that in reducing complexity, the grand strategist will only confirm current opinions and never challenge them. Therefore, the other face of grand strategy looks to the past, in order to maintain accuracy and highlight complexity. Book Reviews