| As might be expected, this week's curated content focuses on both the grand strategy implications of a Joe Biden presidency, and the implications of Donald Trump's decisions between now and inauguration day. There is no dearth of advice of speculation on what a future President Biden might do in terms of foreign policy. Bonnie Kristian's piece bucks conventional wisdom of Biden as soft on China and speculates that he might continue to advance the trend of increasing confrontation with the rising power. Trita Parsi gives detailed strategic advice to the incoming Biden Administration regarding the Iran nuclear deal. Meanwhile, Daniel DePetris calls for a complete "reset" of the cozy alliance between the US and Saudi Arabia's MBS cultivated over the Trump years. On the Russia question, both Doug Bandow and Ted Galen Carpenter speculate on whether a cooling of relations is possible after the extended "Russiagate" fiasco. Those paying attention may have noticed Trump making dramatic moves, particularly on the personnel front in the Pentagon. Jennifer Steinhauer draws attention to the purge and notes that it is preparation for a massive troop withdrawal from Afghanistan. Mark Perry follows this same development noting the significance particularly of foreign policy restrainer Colonel Doug MacGregor's positioning at a high level Pentagon post. If Trump manages to successfully follow through with his promise to withdraw troops from Afghanistan, restrainers are hoping that Biden will not reverse course. Charles Peña makes the case that there are indeed many foreign policy developments under Trump that, for the good of a sensible and restrained foreign policy, Biden should leave alone. Essential Reading A. Trevor Thrall, Jordan Cohen, Cato Institute Bottom line: The Arms Sales Risk Index indicates that the U.S. has pursued increasingly risky arms sales to other nations under President Trump, while also selling more weapons than ... In the News Jennifer Steinhauer, New York Times Asad Dandia, Responsible Statecraft Daniel DePetris, Washington Examiner Mark Perry, Responsible Statecraft Sarah Burns, Foreign Affairs Ted Galen Carpenter, Responsible Statecraft Doug Bandow, American Conservative Annelle Sheline, Responsible Statecraft Christopher Preble, Atlantic Council Daniel Larison, American Conservative Jessica Lee, Responsible Statecraft Kelley Beaucar Vlahos, Responsible Statecraft Trita Paris, Foreign Affairs Andrew Bacevich, American Conservative Dan Caldwell, American Conservative Net Assessment The crew convenes for the first show after Joe Biden’s election victory to consider how Americans want to engage with the rest of the world, and whether the incoming Biden administration will be able to heal the nation’s wounds while also restoring U.S. global leadership. Does an inward focus on the COVID-19 pandemic, a sluggish economy, and racial tensions necessarily mean that the United States will neglect the wider world? Or can it lead by example, proving that by solving its own problems it can help solve global problems as well? Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft For most of its history, the United States avoided making military commitments that would entangle it in European-style power politics. Then, suddenly, it conceived a new role for itself as the world’s armed superpower — and never looked back. In Tomorrow, the World, Stephen Wertheim reveals that American leaders made a conscious decision for global dominance. In just eighteen months before the attack on Pearl Harbor brought the United States into the Second World War, US officials and intellectuals decided not only to enter the war but also to enforce “world order” in perpetuity. That decision lives on today, but it has outlived its reason for being. | 
