Table of Contents
Before him, the diplomat Henry Kissinger — apostle of the precept of pragmatic pursuit of American interests known as “realpolitik” — had also spoken of peace through force.
But the concept is actually much older.
Vegetius, a Roman military strategist from the 4th century, is notably at the origin of the famous maxim: “Si vis pacem, parabellum”, “if you want peace, prepare for war”. And before him the Roman emperor Hadrian would have been at the very origin of this idea of peace by force.
Trump in charge… What consequences for the Belgian economy?
In his quest to return to the White House, Donald Trump promised “strong armed forces” for the United States and to end wars. Since his victory on November 5, he has also repeated this leitmotif of “peace through strength”, just like his next head of American diplomacy, Marco Rubio.
“Pragmatism”
By congratulating Donald Trump, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky praised the Republican’s strategy of peace through force, albeit with a very different interpretation of it.
The Republican has pledged to end the war between Ukraine and Russia very quickly, with some of his advisers suggesting using billions of dollars in US military aid as leverage to force kyiv to accept compromises with the Kremlin.
But in a recent speech, Volodymyr Zelensky said forcing concessions from Ukraine would be “unacceptable.”
“The concept of ‘peace through strength’ has proven its pragmatism and effectiveness more than once,” he said. “It is now more necessary than ever.”
Donald Trump has never expressed his personal vision of the concept.
But for Robert O’Brien, a national security adviser to the Republican during his first term, this would mean first and foremost approaching China head-on as an adversary.
In an article published by the diplomatic journal Foreign Affairs before the election, Robert O’Brien further asserts that, despite the “truncated image” of Donald Trump in the media, the president-elect is a “peacemaker”.
He cites in particular, during Trump’s first term, his campaign for the normalization of relations between several Arab states and Israel, and his agreement with the Taliban for the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan.
American election: what will be the next steps before the inauguration of Donald Trump?
“War by force”
For George Beebe, a former US intelligence analyst, promoting the idea of peace through force “probably goes beyond a simple slogan” for the new administration.
“My personal feeling is that they are serious about using this concept as a guide,” said this official at the Quincy Institute, a think tank which advocates restraint in military matters.
For this former CIA officer, however, a balance is necessary, noting that Ronald Reagan had used both a strengthening of the armed forces and “intelligent diplomacy” to strengthen peace and stability with the USSR.
“If you go too far in extending an olive branch, it can be exploited by your adversaries. But on the other hand, if you go too far in the warrior posture, you can end up with, not peace through force, but war by force,” explains George Beebe.
Jacob Stokes, a researcher at the Center for a New American Security think tank, points out that the idea of peace through force has practical consequences that are often very different from those in theory.
Cutting military aid to Ukraine “could well get you the +peace+ component, but not necessarily the +strength+ component”, underlines Jacob Stokes, for example.
“It’s a very good political slogan for President Trump. The challenge of translating that into foreign policy will be considerable.”
What are the potential risks and drawbacks of adopting a “peace through strength” strategy in international relations?
Q: Can you explain what “peace through strength” means to you and how it relates to the concept of using military force?
Guest 1: Peace through strength is a strategic approach that emphasizes the use of military power to maintain peace and stability. It suggests that if a nation possesses a strong military, it will deter potential adversaries from engaging in aggressive behavior and conflicts. In essence, it argues that showing strength can lead to peace. However, this concept can sometimes be interpreted as using military force to impose one’s will on others, which raises ethical questions about the use of force in maintaining peace.
Guest 2: I believe that “peace through strength” is more nuanced than simply using military force. It involves maintaining a strong military capability while also engaging in diplomacy and negotiations to resolve conflicts. Although military power can play a role in deterring aggression, it should be used as a last resort when all other peaceful means have been exhausted. A stable balance between military strength and diplomatic engagement is necessary for maintaining peace and security.
Q: How do you see the idea of “peace through strength” shaping the foreign policy of the upcoming Trump administration?
Guest 1: Based on the statements made by President Trump and his advisers, it seems that ”peace through strength” will be a guiding principle in his foreign policy. This could lead to an increased focus on military spending and a more assertive approach towards countries like China and Russia. There is also a possibility that the administration may use military aid as leverage to achieve diplomatic goals, such as in the case of Ukraine and Russia.
Guest 2: While it’s difficult to predict the exact shape of the Trump administration’s foreign policy, the emphasis on “peace through strength” could potentially lead to a more hawkish approach. This could result in increased military engagements and interventions around the world, particularly in regions where the United States perceives its interests to be threatened. However, it’s important to note that the success of this policy depends on careful consideration of the geopolitical context and the potential consequences of military action.
Q: Do you think the idea of “peace through strength” is a realistic approach to maintaining international peace and security, or does it risk es
