Podcast appearances and mentions of Benjamin H Friedman

Michael C. Desch, professor of international relations at University of Notre Dame, discusses the disconnect between political science scholarship and policymaking and offers solutions for how to bridge the gap. Show NotesMichael C. Desch bioMichael C. Desch, Cult of the Irrelevant: The Waning Influence of Social Science on National Security (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2019).Paul C. Avey, Michael C. Desch, Eric Parajon, Susan Peterson, Ryan Powers, and Michael J. Tierney, “Does Social Science Inform Foreign Policy? Evidence from a Survey of US National Security, Trade, and Development Officials,” International Studies Quarterly 66, no. 1 (March 2022).Benjamin H. Friedman and Justin Logan, “Why Washington Doesn't Debate Grand Strategy,” Strategic Studies Quarterly 10, no. 4 (Winter 2016): pp. 14-45. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A common argument against U.S. troop withdrawals points to the risk of creating strategic vacuums that rival powers could then fill to great advantage. Benjamin H. Friedman, director of policy at Defense Priorities, explains why such fears are without merit. He discusses, among many topics, the value of territory in contemporary international politics, how power generates paranoia, and whether the U.S. should reduce its force posture abroad.Show Notes:Benjamin H. Friedman bioBenjamin H. Friedman, “Don't Fear Vacuums: We Can Go Home,” Defense Priorities Report, December 7, 2022.Benjamin H. Friedman, “No, Afghanistan Did Not Hurt U.S. ‘Credibility',” UnHerd, August 31, 2022.Benjamin H. Friedman, “Bad Idea: Assuming Trade Depends on the Navy,” Defense360, January 7, 2022.Jennifer Keister, “The Illusion of Chaos: Why Ungoverned Spaces Aren't Ungoverned, and Why That Matters,” Cato Policy Analysis no. 766, December 9, 2014. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Stimson Center senior fellow Emma Ashford and University of Birmingham professor and Cato adjunct scholar Patrick Porter discuss the intensification of the war in Ukraine, Putin's nuclear threats, realist perspectives on Russian objectives, and possible US policy responses. Emma Ashford bioPatrick Porter bioEmma Ashford, “In Praise of Lesser Evils,” Foreign Affairs 101, no. 5 (September/October 2022).Justin Logan, Benjamin H. Friedman, and Patrick Porter, “We're Not All Ukrainians Now,” Politico Europe, May 17, 2022.Emma Ashford and Matthew Kroenig, “How Should the West Respond to Putin's Military Mobilization?” Foreign Policy, September 23, 2022.Patrick Porter, “The Realist Boogeyman,” The Critic, June 15, 2022. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

U.S. defense policy increasingly reflects the view that U.S. threats to defend its Asian allies, and Taiwan, are becoming less credible as Chinese power rises. This view is wrong. Geography and technological trends mean defenders have the advantage - whether the power playing defense is China or its would-be rivals. While the Chinese threat to Taiwan remains worrisome, Asia's defensive advantages are good news for the U.S. as a supporter of the Asian status quo. One minor note: the major European city that is as close to Taipei as Sydney is is MOSCOW, not London. Benjamin H. Friedman is policy director at Defense Priorities and a PhD candidate in political science at the MIT. He previously worked as a Defense Analyst at the Cato Institute and a Researcher at the Center for Defense Information. He's edited three books on defense policy and strategy and has published in a number of academic journals and major publications. Upcoming Events • The Ukraine Crisis (w/ Emma Ashford) Weds 2/16, 7pm ET. https://standtogether.zoom.us/webinar/register/3516437348068/WN_3blHwmwFSAynCEwVfEpXxA • China's Rise: Military Exercises and Regional Cooperation (w/ Kyuri Park) Weds 2/23, 7pm ET. https://standtogether.zoom.us/webinar/register/5116444189497/WN_OmY5gAlBSnCzpYs9ZVeK0A • The Spanish-American War and Its Legacy (w/ Aroop Mukharji) Weds 3/2, 7pm ET. https://standtogether.zoom.us/webinar/register/7016444189231/WN_e8ZTtMkLT1iBH_XudVQLDQ Essay Contest w/ TNI (for students): https://jqas.org/2022-student-foreign-policy-essay-contest/ Strategic Leaders Fellowship (5-15 years FP experience) https://jqas.org/the-strategic-leaders-fellowship/

The chaos that accompanied the U.S. military withdrawal from Afghanistan does not negate the wisdom of bringing the war to an end, despite protestations in Washington about U.S. credibility and the "sustainability" of endless war. Benjamin H. Friedman, policy director at Defense Priorities, weighs in. Show Notes Benjamin H. Friedman bioBenjamin H. Friedman, “Exiting Afghanistan: Ending America's Longest War,” Defense Priorities, August 2019. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Many of you have heard of the Doomsday Clock — a decades-old analogue clock meant to symbolize how close we are to nuclear catastrophe. However far we are from midnight, we are told, is how close we are to disaster. More recently, it is also meant to incorporate the risks of catastrophic climate change. It was started by many of the scientists responsible for the creation of the nuclear weapon. And it is, and has always been, run by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. The Bulletin just set the clock to 100 seconds to midnight — the closest it’s ever been. On Twitter, Ryan remarked that he didn’t think this exercise added much in the way of value. And so, a debate began. Ryan assembled a group to debate the Doomsday Clock (over Manhattans, appropriately). On one side, Miles Pomper of the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies and Benjamin H. Friedman of Defense Priorities. On the other, Jon Wolfsthal and Sharon Squassoni, both of whom sit on the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists’ Science and Security Board. And Ryan served as an admittedly biased moderator.

Most would agree that the world is unsettled, with hotspots in the Middle East, North Korea, the South China Sea, and the Ukraine, to name but a few. Terrorism has complicated international relations. But exactly when, and how, should America act to maintain order? Is a muscular and expeditionary style of engagement to be favored over quiet diplomacy? Is more and faster better than less and slower? How contextual should the answers to these questions be? -- This panel was presented at the 2015 National Lawyers Convention on Friday, November 13, 2015, at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. -- Featuring: Prof. Colin Dueck, Associate Professor, George Mason University School of Policy, Government, and International Affairs; Mr. Benjamin H. Friedman, Research Fellow in Defense and Homeland Security Studies, Cato Institute; Mr. François-Henri Briard, Supreme Court Attorney (France), Delaporte, Briard & Trichet; and Hon. Mike J. Rogers, Former U.S. House of Representatives, Michigan. Moderator: Mr. Brian H. Hook, former Assistant Secretary of State.

The President is considering new military action in Iraq as that country's stability is tested. Benjamin H. Friedman argues that many advocates for military action in Iraq are using "sunk costs logic" that the past error in Iraq now justifies further investment. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

May 2014 featuring Julian Sanchez, Dan Froomkin, Peter Schuck, Michael Malice, Sigrid Fry-Revere, Benjamin H. Friedman, Betty Medsger See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Even on humanitarian grounds, the war in Libya didn't help the people of that country prosper, says Benjamin H. Friedman.Did the Military Intervention in Libya Succeed? See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

June 2011 featuring Malou Innocent, Benjamin H. Friedman, David Rittgers, Charles Murray, John Samples, Peter Ackermann, Andrew P. Morriss See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.