ASU professor on American deterrence as tensions rise between US, China
Peter Bergen, National Security Analyst at CNN and professor of practice in ASU’s School of Politics and Global Studies, discusses the use of sanctions and nuclear weapons as deterrents. Photo by Hager Sharp
As tensions continue to rise between the U.S. and China, the Leadership, Diplomacy and National Security Lab at the ASU Barrett and O’Connor Washington Center hosted a lecture on April 23 titled "Deterring America's Rivals and Enemies" with Arizona State University Professor of Practice Peter Bergen.
As an author of multiple books on American foreign policy and terrorism as well as a documentary producer, podcast host, vice president at New America and national security analyst for CNN, Bergen is one of the leading voices on national security and U.S. foreign strategy.
His lecture explored past, present and future U.S. deterrence strategies in the face of global challenges, highlighting the impact of the United States’ military power, democratic politics and resolve. Bergen defined deterrence as not only a combination of foreign strategy and military capacity but also the ability to demonstrate that a country has the resolve and the ability to execute that strategy and use that capacity to prevail against foreign threats.
Highlighting examples from Lebanon and Somalia, Bergen noted that U.S. withdrawal from conflicts can often embolden enemies. Past withdrawals gave enemies of the U.S. a false sense of security, forgetting the dynamics of American resolve.
This idea that America would not respond to direct attack has occurred at multiple points in its history.
“The Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in 1941; they did it to preemptively prevent the United States allowing them to conquer Asia ... and they thought the United States would do nothing,” Bergen said.
He went on to cite Osama Bin Laden as another example of underestimation: “When Al-Qaeda attacked on 9/11, the United States reacted in a way that produced exactly the opposite outcome of what the Bin Laden wanted. The United States became more involved in the Middle East than at any other time in its history.”
Bergen cited the book "Conflict: The Evolution of Warfare from 1945 to Ukraine" by Gen. David Petraeus and Andrew Roberts, saying, “They make a good point that when you do a surprise attack, you always guarantee that the person you surprised will react in a very, very, very unfavorable way. Be careful what you wish for.”
Considering the Cold War, Bergen noted deterrence held multiple forms, including mutually assured destruction and the doctrine of containment, which served as an attempt to stop the spread of communism. Post-Cold War, U.S. foreign and military policy saw dynamic shifts, some helpful, while others created opportunity for future conflicts.
“The idea that history had a direction was one of the mistakes that we made after the Cold War. Obviously, we won against the Soviets, but that didn't mean peace and harmony was going to break out,” Bergen said.
This triumphalism impacted American military and policy, setting the stage for the modern conflicts with Russia in Ukraine and with China. Looking at the current landscape, Bergen agrees that we’re at a turning point.
“We're at an interesting moment in American history. We have the possibility of the invasion of Taiwan. We have the possibility of the Trump presidency and perhaps pulling out of NATO or at least making it much less effective,” Bergen said. “One of the lessons I've noticed, a very salubrious one actually, is that (if) you give up nuclear weapons, you're basically making yourself a target.”
Bergen went on to mention how the modern conflicts between India and Pakistan have de-escalated now that both sides have nuclear weapons. The conversation also touched on rising tensions between China and the U.S. in the tech industry, with Bergen emphasizing the risks of relying on Chinese chip production and the need for the U.S. to invest in domestic chip production. After nuclear power, cyber capabilities and technological deterrents are top of mind.
“If you think about the fact that Biden has banned the sale of AI — American AI — to China, American quantum computing, there is a recognition that there’s certainly no reason to help our main rival by giving them this technology,” Bergen said.
However, this modern version of containment doesn’t come without concern, especially as the U.S. shifts tactics. Historically, the U.S. has always relied on strategic ambiguity as a part of the core of foreign policy. Bergen notes that when it comes to Taiwan, Biden has drastically changed tactics.
“I think our deterrents remain quite high,” Bergen said. He cited concerns about nuclear capability and continued cyber growth, but at the end of the day, Bergen was most concerned about the possibility of conflict in Taiwan.
“There's no strategic ambiguity. If China tries (to take) Taiwan, we will respond, which is an interesting development. Taiwan is a flashpoint we have to be concerned about,” he said.
In the Q&A after, Gen. Benjamin Freakley praised Bergen’s analysis while sharing concern about America’s true military capacity.
“There’s just not a sense that we have a national strategy and a national capacity to demonstrate as we did in ‘82 with the retooling of the military and our capacity and our strategies. It just doesn't line up right now, and it's something interesting to watch,” said Freakley, who a professor of practice and special advisor to president at ASU.
While Bergen agreed that there are concerns on the horizon, he praised American innovation and resolve.
“I think we will keep reinventing ourselves because that's just the nature of the beast. I can't think of a single major technological innovation in the last century that didn't emerge from the United States. American innovation is kind of our secret sauce,” Bergen said.
Watch the full guest lecture.
More Local, national and global affairs
'War Game' documentary highlights threats of extremism to national security
The riots at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, were a wake-up call that political divisiveness can turn violent, threatening the peaceful transition of power.Two filmmakers took that real-life…
ASU named Fulbright HSI Leader for third year
For the third year in a row, Arizona State University has been named as a Fulbright HSI (Hispanic-Serving Institution) Leader.The designation, from the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of…
ASU program prepares Tucson government employees to serve communities more effectively
Up-and-coming local government leaders in Tucson say an Arizona State University development program for municipal and county employees helps them seek career advancement with enhanced knowledge and…