A Pragmatic take on Global Affairs

An Introduction to our Global Affairs Page

In the current "America First" political climate, "globalism" is often viewed with suspicion. A common belief persists that the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans provide sufficient security for the United States in times of international strife. This assumption, however, is dangerously outdated. A ballistic missile from Russia, China, or North Korea can reach U.S. airspace in 20+ minutes; a submarine-launched missile can do so in as little as five.

For the United States, a retreat from globalism is a retreat from its own prosperity and security. The U.S. economy is fundamentally interwoven with the world through international trade—a system supporting tens of millions of American jobs, providing U.S. goods access to global markets, and ensuring the flow of essential resources. This economic framework is, in turn, protected by a robust network of military alliances, most notably NATO. These alliances are not acts of charity but cornerstones of American security, extending U.S. influence and ensuring that security burdens are shared.

This is not a new concept; after 9/11, more than 64 countries contributed troops, material, and money to U.S.-led efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq. To forget this is to have a perilously short memory.

This is why the perspective of figures like Pete Hegseth and J.D. Vance, who criticize allies for their perceived reliance on the U.S., is so short-sighted. That reliance is the direct result of a successful, decades-long American strategy that built a stable world order from which the U.S. is the primary beneficiary. To actively undermine this system by needlessly antagonizing critical partners like Canada, Denmark, or Panama—is dangerously counter-productive. Such actions erode the trust that forms the bedrock of America’s global power, destabilize its economic interests, and ultimately isolate the U.S., leaving it weaker, not stronger. In times of strife, friends are a VERY good thing to have!