US National Security Policy: Economic Disruptions and the Search for Balance

Intricate diplomatic chessboard, US, China, Russia on a world map, tense negotiation scene, contrasting light & shadow, muted earthy tones, underlying tension, uneven scales balancing national security & economic cooperation, disrupted supply chains, subtle nods to abstract politics, somber mood.

The national security policy of the United States has recently been the center of attention for international analysts, as it’s seen as an abusive tool for establishing blockades and economic sanctions against countries like China and Russia. This is despite US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen acknowledging that the decoupling of the US and Chinese economies would be nothing short of disastrous.

On one hand, Yellen has spoken of seeking a constructive and fair economic relationship with China, with no interest in the US gaining an economic advantage through protective measures. However, analysts argue that these policies result in global economic disruptions and negatively impact supply chains. For instance, Lewis Ndichu from the Africa Policy Institute has suggested that prioritizing national security over other important issues is essentially putting the cart ahead of the horse.

On the other side, American analysts like Gary Hufbauer, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, have expressed similar concerns, noting that the measures implemented have gone far beyond the reasonable scope of national security. Hufbauer highlights the existing tariffs on aluminum and steel and questions the need to link other articles, such as commodity chips, to national security when they clearly don’t have any security implications.

The politicization of trade is another key reason pointed out by experts as the motivation behind these postures. Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Wang Wenbin has noted that the US is using national security as a weapon to control technology and trade issues, ultimately stifling the developmental rights of other nations. In addition, Cavince Adhere, a Kenya-based international relations scholar, explains that US politicians often capitalize on anti-China sentiments to garner votes, which eventually influences the US’s foreign policy towards China.

In conclusion, while the US government maintains that its actions are in the interest of national security, the concerns expressed by international analysts should not be ignored. The global market is interconnected, and measures that disrupt supply chains and impose economic sanctions on certain countries can prove detrimental to all parties involved. As such, it is crucial to strike a balance between safeguarding national security and promoting constructive economic relationships among global players.


Sponsored ad